Skip to main content
Download PDF

Evaluation of human monkeypox knowledge and beliefs regarding emerging viral infections among healthcare workers

International Journal of Emergency Medicine volume 16, Article number: 75 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate possible factors that might be accompanied by high level of human monkey pox (HMPX) knowledge and to explain the relationship between HMPX knowledge and Beliefs regarding emerging viral infections.

Study design

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted for the implementation of this study.

Methods

Study was conducted at two general hospitals in Mansoura City (Old General Hospital and International Hospital) El Dakahlia Governorate among 620 healthcare workers (HCWs) using a self-managed questionnaire for 1 week (1 to 7 January 2023). The questionnaire has items adapted from the previously published literature to assess HMPX knowledge and Beliefs regarding emerging viral infections.

Results

The mean age of the study sample was 27.97 years and most of them were female (86.1%). Physicians and other HCWs (nurses, laboratory technicians, radiographer technicians, and pharmacists) had significantly different levels of knowledge of monkeypox for the majority of the questions. A higher belief was found among two items: viruses are biological weapons manufactured by the superpowers to take global control and the government is misleading the public about the cause of the virus.

Conclusion

This study discovered lower levels of knowledge of HMPX among HCWs in Egypt. Beliefs about emerging viral infections were widespread, and future research should look into their potential negative impact on health behavior.

Introduction

Monkeypox is a viral disease transmitted to humans from animals (zoonosis) due to MPXV of the Orthopoxvirus genus; this Genus comprises three other species pathogenic to humans [1]: cowpox virus, vaccinia virus, variola virus which causes smallpox [2]. In the late 1970s, smallpox was successfully eradicated from population [3]. MPXV was discovered in 1958 during an outbreak among monkeys in a Danish laboratory [4]. However, it stayed not recognized as a human disease until 1970, when a 9-month-old child in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), formerly known as Zaïre, became infected. In the tropical rain forests of the Congo basin (CB) and West Africa (WA) MPX is usually found [5,6,7], and DRC remains to report the majority of cases every year [8, 9], primarily in children under the age of ten. In the Central African Republic (CAR), the most recent epidemic occurred in October 2016, resulting in 26 cases, of which three were laboratory-confirmed. In 2003, the United States of America reported the first MPX epidemic outside of Africa (USA) (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/monkeypox), (after 800 small African mammals were shipped from Ghana into Texas [4]. HMPX will consider a potential threat in 2022 with increased cases in non-endemic regions [10]. The WHO declared on July 23 2022 that the monkeypox epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern. The Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population has reported 13 unconfirmed cases, of which only two have been confirmed. Patients have been quarantined in an isolation-designated hospital. With the patient’s contacts, all essential health and preventative measures have been taken in accordance with the treatment and follow-up protocols recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). MPX virus is divided into two clades: West African and CB (Central African). CB clade appears to cause severe disease more frequently, with case fatality ratios (CFR) of up to 10% previously reported [11]. DRC has a CFR of around 3% among suspected cases. In an African population that is usually younger, the West African clade has previously been associated with a lower overall CFR of approximately 1%. There have only been a few deaths from MPX since 2017 [12]. HMPX is primarily transmitted through the saliva/respiratory tract or contact with infected animals’ skin lesions [13, 14]. High prevalence of cases among homosexual men and those having multiple sexual partners. The current HMPX outbreak raises concerns about the possibility of sexual transmission [15]. The disease’s clinical manifestation is similar to smallpox but less severe [16]. Fever, headache, back pain, myalgia, lymphadenopathy, and skin rash between the symptoms [17]. Cutaneous lesions, which progress from maculopapular to vesicles, pustules, and crusts, are most commonly present on the extremities and, in severe cases can occur anywhere on the body [16]. Possible consequences include secondary bacterial infections, respiratory problems, bronchopneumonia, gastrointestinal involvement, dehydration, sepsis, encephalitis, and corneal infections with subsequent vision loss. Since the MPXV infection is not currently treatable, patients are managed with supportive care and symptomatic therapy [18]. The main difference between smallpox and MPX is that the latter results in lymphadenopathy. HMPX prophylactic is based on the smallpox vaccine, which has been found to provide 85% protection [19]. The disease can persist for up to 4 weeks before the skin lesions disappear. In recent years, infectious illness outbreaks were frequently accompanied by the viral spread of misinformation, social media panic, and strange theories that could spread more quickly than the disease itself. theories are prevalent due to recent Ebola outbreaks and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic [10]. Thus, it may be suggested that the extreme spread of theories surrounding the 2022 HMPX outbreak was to be expected. Despite the widespread acceptance of conspiracies appearing to be harmless, reports of potential negative effects have been made, especially in the circumstance of health-seeking behavior expressed in vaccine hesitancy and mistrust of scientific and medical organizations. Therefore, taking into account their significance in reducing the harmful effects of these beliefs, it is essential to investigate the prevalence of stage theories, especially among HCWs [20].

HCWs are an essential group taken into consideration for focused awareness and knowledge to be ready for providing the appropriate reactions, particularly during outbreaks and the emergence of infectious diseases. strang theories appeared during the current HMPX outbreak, including suspicions that the virus was bioengineered for a political reason. The primary responsibility of HCWs is to detect cases for early isolation and to immunize close contacts for control and prevention [21, 22].

Several studies have been carried out to evaluate the general public and HCWs’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP). Unsatisfactory knowledge (33.3%) of HMPX was discovered by Sallam et al. in their study [22] among HCWs. Additionally, according to Alshahrani, Najim Z., et al. about 55% of the survey respondents were found to have “good knowledge” of human MPX [23]. Another study of Saudi medical students revealed that 72% of them had inadequate knowledge of MPXV [24]. Thus, it is important to evaluate possible factors that might be accompanied by higher knowledge of HMPX and estimate the effects of such theories, particularly on the behavior of those who seek out health care.

Method design of the subject

Design

“The current cross-sectional study was based on the distribution of an online self-administered questionnaire to evaluate HMPX knowledge and Beliefs Regarding Emerging Viral Infections among Healthcare Workers. The occupational categories that fit our definition of HCWs included: physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and medical technicians”

Setting

This research was carried out at two general hospitals in Mansoura City “Old General Hospital and International Hospital”, El Dakahlia Governorate for 1 week (1 to 7 January 2023).

Sample

The study sample was collected using a convenience sampling technique. G-Power statistical software (version 3.1.9.7; Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany) was used to calculate sample size [25]. When 620 participants were involved in the research, the power analysis revealed that an 80% power would be found with 95 percent confidence.

The inclusion criteria were as follows:

  1. 1)

    A healthcare worker practicing in the hospital during the epidemic.

  2. 2)

    Expressing readiness to answer a questionnaire. HCWs who participated in the study were provided with electronic informed consent and those who refused to answer a questionnaire were excluded.

Study tools

The study researchers established a self-managed electronic questionnaire. Items in the questionnaire adapted from previously published literature were used to assess HMPX knowledge and strange theories about emerging viral infections.

The survey link of the electronic questionnaire “was created on Google Forms and shared on social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Whatsapp, Telegram and the participants’ emails”. Responses to all items are mandatory to look.

The survey was divided into three parts:

  1. I:

    Personal data

    Demographic data consisted of HCWs’ age, sex, workplace type, education, and profession.

  2. II:

    HCWs’ knowledge of HMPX

    It was used to ask HCWs’ knowledge of HMPX and involved 13 questions. Questionnaire items were drawn from Harapan et al. [26]. The answers to each item were “yes” or “no”. Correct answers were scored as 1 and incorrect responses were scored as 0. The total scores were calculated for each item by adding the items’ scores (possible range of 0–13 marks). The frequency of each response selected and the percentages will be used to calculate the results (MPX K-score). Additionally, the mean score was calculated. Using a modified Bloom’s criteria cut-off point, the general knowledge scores of HCWs were classified as good if they were between 80 and 100% (10.4–13), moderate if they were between 60 and 79% (10.3–7.8), and poor if they were below 60% (total score 7.8). Knowledge about the monkeypox was evaluated using the following 13 items [27]:

    1. 1)

      There is an outbreak of human MPX in the world.

    2. 2)

      MPX is prevalent in Egypt.

    3. 3)

      MPX is prevalent in Central and Western Africa.

    4. 4)

      A virus causes MPX.

    5. 5)

      Human-to-human transmission of MPX occurs easily.

    6. 6)

      Smallpox and MPX have the same symptoms and signs.

    7. 7)

      Skin rash is one of the symptoms or signs of HMPX.

    8. 8)

      Vesicle is one of the symptoms or signs of HMPX.

    9. 9)

      MPX could be transmitted through a bite from an infected monkey.

    10. 10)

      A flu-like syndrome is one of the early signs or symptoms of humans.

    11. 11)

      Antibiotics are utilized to treat HMPX.

    12. 12)

      Diarrhoea is one of the symptoms or signs of HMPX.

    13. 13)

      Vaccination is available to prevent HMPX.

  3. III:

    Beliefs regarding viral infections:

    The items were adopted with the help of Freeman et al. studies on COVID-19 Medicine a 2020 beliefs [21, 22]. Ten-item questionnaires were used for the evaluation, and the potential answers were strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral/have no opinion (3), agree (4), and highly agree (5) on a 5-Likert scale.

    The following items of beliefs:

    1. 1)

      I am skeptical about the official explanation regarding the cause of virus emergence

    2. 2)

      The virus is a hoax.

    3. 3)

      Most viruses are artificial.

    4. 4)

      I do not trust the information about viruses from scientific experts.

    5. 5)

      The spread of viruses is a deliberate effort by a group of influential people to make money.

    6. 6)

      The spread of viruses is a deliberate attempt by global companies to take control.

    7. 7)

      Lockdowns in response to emerging infection are aimed at mass surveillance and to destabilize the economy for financial gain

    8. 8)

      Lockdowns in response to emerging infections are aimed at mass surveillance and controlling every aspect of our lives.

    9. 9)

      Lockdown is a way to terrify, isolate, and demoralize a society as a whole to reshape society to fit specific interests.

    10. 10)

      Viruses are biological weapons manufactured by superpowers to take global control. Higher beliefs item scores showed a greater belief in Beliefs underlying the emergence of viruses and subsequent measures.

Collection of data

The HCWs’ informed electronic consent to participate in the study was obtained prior to enrollment once the study’s objective had been clarified. The HCWs were informed that any topic may be clarified by researchers and personal relationships. A review of local and global literature was conducted on various aspects of HMPX using published scientific papers, and textbooks. After reviewing related literature, the study tools were advanced. To determine the extent to which the instrument measures what was hypothetical, a panel of five experts in community health nursing, epidemiology, and statistics accepted the devices.

The test-retest technique was employed to maintain score stability over a short period of time. The degree to which the survey items measure the same models was determined by measuring internal consistency. Internal stability was determined to be reliable by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient test to be (0.81). A pilot research on 10% of HCWs was presented (62 HCWs). They took great effort to measure the study tool’s clarity and applicability, divided the time needed for data collection, and identified any challenges or issues that might arise during data collection as well as any activities that might overload them. The necessary changes were made in response to the data that was collected, some questions were complemented and others were explained or absent.

Statistical analysis

All the essential information was acquired at once and checked for extensiveness; using IBM SPSS for Windows software version 25 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, NY, USA), they were coded, verified, and analyzed [28, 29]. With the use of calculated frequencies and proportions for qualitative data, the mean and standard deviation for quantitative data, statistics were developed to simplify data. Comparing qualitative data among physicians and other healthcare professionals was done using the chi-square test. Using logistic regression analysis, factors that are associated with more beliefs were identified. P values below 0.05 were regarded as statistically significant in this investigation.

Ethical consideration

Ethical approval was obtained from the ethical committee at the International Islamic Center for Population Studies and Research, Al-Azhar University (IRB no.: 49/2022), about the study’s purpose and their participation was entirely voluntary and not-for-profit. The participants were made aware that there would be no consequences if they decided to leave the study at any time. The questionnaire’s first page contained a representation of electronic informed consent. The researchers created and saved their code numbers. The study ensured data confidentiality by keeping participants’ data anonymous.

Results

Characteristics of the study participants

The whole number of study participants was 620 HCWs. The common characteristics of the study respondents are demonstrated in Table 1. The mean age of the participants was 27.97 ± 7.32 years, the majority of the models were female (86.1%), and (69.4%) were characterized by university education and below. In addition, (65.5%) of the participants are working in community health care, and (84.5%) did not receive human monkeypox information during education. Additionally, (88.1%) did not hear about human monkeypox before. Figure 1 demonstrates the results of the HCWs’ knowledge of human monkeypox, the whole level of knowledge regarding HMPX was poor, with only four items having right response levels > 70%.

Table 1 Characteristics of the participants (n = 620)
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

HCWS knowledge toward HMPX

Full size image

Human monkeypox knowledge is divided by gender

A majority of the items (10/13) between males and females revealed no statistically significant variations in the degree of monkeypox knowledge, as compared to the three items in Table 2 where females demonstrated a significantly higher level of knowledge.

Table 2 Gender effect on human monkeypox knowledge
Full size table

Human monkeypox knowledge is divided by professions

Physicians had a greater level of knowledge in eight items. On the other hand, no statistically significant variations were observed in the level of monkeypox knowledge between physicians and other HCWs demonstrated in Table 3.

Table 3 The level of HMPX knowledge between the study participants by professions
Full size table

Overall knowledge level across subgroups

Table 4 showed that age and profession were the only significant factors associated with better HMPX knowledge.

Table 4 Factors associated with human monkeypox (HMPX) knowledge in the whole study sample
Full size table

Beliefs items

Approximately half of the participants thought that viruses are biological weapons and I am skeptical about the official explanation regarding the cause of virus emergence. In addition, 60.3% of the study sample reported not confident information about the viruses from scientific specialists. On the other hand more than half of the participants do not believe that the virus is a hoax. Most viruses are artificial and the spread of viruses is a deliberate effort by a group of influential people to make money shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Beliefs items
Full size table

A greater mean score indicated a greater belief was found among females (p = 0.043). Physicians’ mean scores were lower than those of the other HCWs (p = 0.027). Table 6 shows that respondents under 30 had a higher mean score than respondents 30 or older (p = 0.031).

Table 6 Factors associated with human monkeypox (HMPX) beliefs in the whole study sample
Full size table

Discussion

The current study found that HCWs have knowledge gaps about the HMPX infection. This finding was observed in spite of extensive media coverage of the issue and the prompt and timely publication of literature covering almost all aspects of the condition [30, 31].

Therefore, consideration of HCWs’ knowledge to deal with potential threats of reemerging viruses is necessary for the development of efficient and well-organized response plans. In order to care for patients, help in control efforts, and deal with potential difficulties with stress and mental health problems typically experienced by HCWs in epidemic conditions, frontline HCWs need the correct direction [26].

The findings of our study were consistent with recent and more current research that revealed lacks in knowledge level of HMPX between physicians in Indonesia, health students in Jordan and Health Professionals in Kuwait [32].

In the current study, the level of awareness about monkeypox was higher than that reported for the general population in Saudi Arabia [33] as was to be expected.

Physicians demonstrated a higher degree of awareness about the condition despite the overall inadequate HMPX knowledge level that was described in this study. This outcome was consistent with that of a recent research reported among Jordanian HCWs [22]. The poorer knowledge of HMPX among other HCWs recommended more efforts to educate and train HCWs [34].

In this study, it was discovered that 31.3% of the study participants thought that “lockdowns in response to emerging infection are aimed at mass surveillance and to control every aspect of our lives,” as well as 58.4% who thought that “viruses are biological weapons manufactured by the superpowers to take global control.” According to Freeman et al. study, a significant percentage of people who held such beliefs were associated with medical mistrust and lower levels of compliance with COVID-19 pandemic control measures [21]. In our study, poorer HMPX knowledge was linked with higher acceptance of these Beliefs about emerging viral infection, which is similar to recent studies among HCWs in Jordan [4]. It is essential to emphasize that the cross-sectional study design cannot be used to assess the present direction of this link or the cause-effect relationship. The findings were also discussed in relation to Kuwaiti healthcare workers’ hesitation to get the COVID-19 vaccine and their vaccine-related conspiracies [22, 35].

This study also discovered that younger HCWs were likelier to have good knowledge than older workers. The younger HCWs have better access to information regarding MPX, which is mostly available online because they are more familiar with using the internet. Older doctors may also rely more on their personal experiences than information acquired from outside sources [36].

It is common for new physicians to work in community health centers, which are primary healthcare facilities and offer both curative and preventive services to the general public. Female sex and other HCWs are associated with higher Beliefs regarding virus emergence in this study. A similar pattern was observed by Sallam et al. in a recent survey among Students in Jordanian Health [7].

In this study, the most reported information about viruses was received by experts. This outcome is supported by data from recent research conducted in Turkey [37]. The contribution of scientists, physicians, and scientific journals emphasizes the importance of information sources in giving accurate knowledge, which may have a positive effect on health behavior.

Knowledge gaps about HMPX were found in this study’s analysis of human-to-human transmission. 36.8% of the participants correctly answered “human-to-human transmission of monkeypox occurs easily.” for the question. Recent studies using the same knowledge item have found similar results [10, 22, 38]. Prior to the outbreak in 2022, reports of human-to-human transmission of MPXV were made, and this is now becoming clear. However, it would be highlighted that the spread needs close contact not occur as frequently as diseases produced by respiratory viruses (such as SARS-CoV-2) [39]. Consequently, the importance of providing correct information about illness between HCWs cannot be ignored. As a result, this strategy between HCWs can help in educating the public and offering recommendations for patients, taking into account their significant role during this outbreak. This strategy should be motivated by the perfect knowledge required to be aware but not worried. A significant proportion of the participants in this study (31.5%) misidentified diarrhea as an HMPX symptom. For a prompt diagnosis of HMPX and the following application of control measures like contact tracing and isolation, a high index of suspicion is required. However, a lack of accurate information on the wide range of HMPX clinical symptoms could result in unnecessary diagnostic tests and the development of patient anxiety, wasting vital resources [40].

Conclusion

A sample of HCWs had knowledge gaps about HMPX that were found in Egypt. Our findings revealed that low level of human monkeypox knowledge through sociodemographic, medical professional characteristics, workplace, as well as various levels of previous exposure to MPX information. Furthermore, younger physicians and those employed in community health centers appear to be more well-informed about MPX than older physicians and those working in private and general hospitals. There were numerous beliefs on new viral diseases. Future research should focus on the impact of the widespread adoption of conspiratorial thoughts on the response to the HMPX outbreak. These beliefs call for rapid, effective responses.

Recommendations

We recommend the public and HCWs with less education to participate in health education programs. Continuous training of all HCWs on proper infection prevention measures.

Limitations

It is important to acknowledge the study’s limitations. The cross-sectional design of the study limits the causality of the findings. The data collection method was via an online survey, another limitation that could carry a risk for non-response bias and may lead to different characteristics between the non-respondents and the respondents. The study researchers tried to maximize the sample size by forwarding the survey link to the different social media platforms and extending the data collection period to overcome the impact of these biases.

In Mansoura City (El Dakahlia Governorate) not all HCWs were represented in all hospital categories; some HCWs worked in private and general hospitals.

Availability of data and materials

On reasonable request, the corresponding author will provide the datasets created and used in the current study.

References

  1. Marennikova SS, Moyer RW. Classification of Poxviruses and brief characterization of the genus Orthopoxvirus. In: Orthopoxviruses pathogenic for humans. Springer; 2005. pp. 11–18.

  2. Kleinkauf N, Verweij PE, Arendrup MC, Donnelly PJ, Cuenca-Estrella M, Fraaije B, Melchers WJG, Adriaenssens N, Kema GHJ, Ullmann A. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control: risk assessment on the impact of environmental usage of triazoles on the development and spread of resistance to medical triazoles in Aspergillus species. Solna: ECDC; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Silva NIO, de Oliveira JS, Kroon EG, Trindade GDS, Drumond BP. Here, there, and everywhere: the wide host range and geographic distribution of zoonotic orthopoxviruses. Viruses. 2020;13:43.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Parker S, Buller RM. A review of experimental and natural infections of animals with monkeypox virus between 1958 and 2012. Future Virol. 2013;8:129–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Ladnyj ID, Ziegler P, Kima E. A human infection caused by monkeypox virus in Basankusu Territory, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Bull World Health Organ. 1972;46:593.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kalthan E, Tenguere J, Ndjapou SG, Koyazengbe TA, Mbomba J, Marada RM, Rombebe P, Yangueme P, Babamingui M, Sambella A. Investigation of an outbreak of monkeypox in an area occupied by armed groups, Central African Republic. Med Mal Infect. 2018;48:263–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoff NA, Doshi RH, Colwell B, Kebela-Illunga B, Mukadi P, Mossoko M, Muyembe-Tamfum J-J, Okitolonda-Wemakoy E, Lloyd-Smith J, Rimoin AW. Evolution of a disease surveillance system: an increase in reporting of human monkeypox disease in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2001–2013. Int J Trop Dis Health. 2017;25(2):IJTDH.35885.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. McCollum AM, Damon IK. Human monkeypox. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58:260–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sale TA, Melski JW, Stratman EJ. Monkeypox: an epidemiologic and clinical comparison of African and US disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;55:478–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Sallam M, Al-Mahzoum K, Dardas LA, Al-Tammemi AB, Al-Majali L, Al-Naimat H, Jardaneh L, AlHadidi F, Al-Salahat K, Al-Ajlouni E. Knowledge of human monkeypox and its relation to conspiracy beliefs among students in jordanian health schools: filling the knowledge gap on emerging Zoonotic Viruses. Medicina (B Aires). 2022;58:924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakazawa Y, Mauldin MR, Emerson GL, Reynolds MG, Lash RR, Gao J, Zhao H, Li Y, Muyembe J-J, MbalaKingebeni P. A phylogeographic investigation of African monkeypox. Viruses. 2015;7:2168–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kozlov M. Monkeypox outbreaks: 4 key questions researchers have. Nature. 2022;606:238–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bunge EM, Hoet B, Chen L, Lienert F, Weidenthaler H, Baer LR, Steffen R. The changing epidemiology of human monkeypox—a potential threat? A systematic review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2022;16(2):e0010141.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Hutson CL, Olson VA, Carroll DS, Abel JA, Hughes CM, Braden ZH, Weiss S, Self J, Osorio JE, Hudson PN. A Prairie dog animal model of systemic orthopoxvirus disease using West African and Congo basin strains of monkeypox virus. J Gen Virol. 2009;90:323–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Organization WH. Public health advice for gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men on the recent outbreak of monkeypox. 2022.

  16. Organization WH. Global action plan on physical activity 2018–2030: more active people for a healthier world. World Health Organization, 2019. ISBN 9241514183.

  17. Organization WH. WHO Advisory committee on variola virus research: report of the nineteenth meeting, 1-2 November 2017, Geneva, Switzerland. World Health Organization; 2018.

  18. Brown K, Leggat PA. Human monkeypox: current state of knowledge and implications for the future. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2016;1:8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Grant R, Nguyen L-BL, Breban R. Modelling human-to-human transmission of monkeypox. Bull World Health Organ. 2020;98:638.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Sallam M, Dababseh D, Yaseen A, Al-Haidar A, Ababneh NA, Bakri FG, Mahafzah A. Conspiracy beliefs are associated with lower knowledge and higher anxiety levels regarding COVID-19 among students at the University of Jordan. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:4915.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Freeman D, Waite F, Rosebrock L, Petit A, Causier C, East A, Jenner L, Teale A-L, Carr L, Mulhall S. Coronavirus conspiracy beliefs, mistrust, and compliance with government guidelines in England. Psychol Med. 2022;52:251–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sallam M, Al-Mahzoum K, Al-Tammemi AB, Alkurtas M, Mirzaei F, Kareem N, Al-Naimat H, Jardaneh L, Al-Majali L, AlHadidi A. Assessing healthcare workers’ knowledge and their confidence in the diagnosis and management of human monkeypox: a cross-sectional study in a Middle Eastern Country. In: Proceedings of the Healthcare. Vol. 10. MDPI; 2022. p. 1722.

  23. Alshahrani NZ, Algethami MR, Alarifi AM, Alzahrani F, Alshehri EA, Alshehri AM, Sheerah HA, Abdelaal A, Sah R, Rodriguez-Morales AJ. Knowledge and attitude regarding monkeypox virus among physicians in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. Vaccines. 2022;10:2099.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Alshahrani NZ, Mitra S, Alkuwaiti AA, Alhumam MN, Altmimi SMB, Alamri MHM, Albalawi ZAS, Almorgi MW, Alharbi HKD, Alshahrani SM. Medical students’ perception regarding the re-emerging monkeypox virus: an institution-based cross-sectional study from Saudi Arabia. Cureus. 2022;14(8):e28060.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Abouzed M, Elawdy AK, Abou Elzahab NF, Abuhegazy H, Ahmed SE, Altuhayni AS, Salama B. Study of burning out, knowledge and attitude of Egyptian psychiatrist towards COVID-19 pandemic.

  26. Harapan H, Setiawan AM, Yufika A, Anwar S, Wahyuni S, Asrizal FW, Sufri MR, Putra RP, Wijayanti NP, Salwiyadi S. Knowledge of human monkeypox viral infection among general practitioners: a cross-sectional study in Indonesia. Pathog Glob Health. 2020;114:68–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Armstrong P. Bloom’s taxonomy. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching; 2010.

  28. Ali HH, Yousif AM, Abd El-Haleem SA. Health awareness program to pregnant women regarding corona virus disease (Covid 19).

  29. Alsulaiman SA, Rentner TL. The use of the health belief model to assess US college students’ perceptions of COVID-19 and adherence to preventive measures. J Public Health Res. 2021;2021:jphr-2021.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Tarín-Vicente EJ, Alemany A, Agud-Dios M, Ubals M, Suñer C, Antón A, Arando M, Arroyo-Andrés J, Calderón-Lozano L, Casañ C. Clinical presentation and virological assessment of confirmed human monkeypox virus cases in Spain: a prospective observational cohort study. Lancet. 2022;400:661–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Morgan CN, Whitehill F, Doty JB, Schulte J, Matheny A, Stringer J, Delaney LJ, Esparza R, Rao AK, McCollum AM. Environmental persistence of monkeypox virus on surfaces in household of person with travel-associated infection, Dallas, Texas, USA, 2021. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022;28:1982–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Alsanafi M, Al-Mahzoum K, Sallam M. Monkeypox knowledge and confidence in diagnosis and management with evaluation of emerging virus infection conspiracies among health professionals in Kuwait. Pathogens. 2022;11:994.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Alshahrani NZ, Alzahrani F, Alarifi AM, Algethami MR, Alhumam MN, Ayied HAM, Awan AZ, Almutairi AF, Bamakhrama SA, Almushari BS. Assessment of knowledge of monkeypox viral infection among the general population in Saudi Arabia. Pathogens. 2022;11:904.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Fraher EP, Pittman P, Frogner BK, Spetz J, Moore J, Beck AJ, Armstrong D, Buerhaus PI. Ensuring and sustaining a pandemic workforce. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:2181–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Al-Sanafi M, Sallam M. Psychological determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers in Kuwait: a cross-sectional study using the 5C and vaccine conspiracy beliefs scales. Vaccines. 2021;9:701.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Hisham R, Ng CJ, Liew SM, Hamzah N, Ho GJ. Why is there variation in the practice of evidence-based medicine in primary care? A qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e010565.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Ajibo TH, Obi-Keguna CN, Iyiani CC. Monkey pox and destabilization of community life in Nigeria: implication for social work practice. In: Proceedings of the CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1st. p. 72.

  38. Ciccozzi M, Petrosillo N. The monkeypox pandemic as a worldwide emergence: much ado? Infect Dis Rep. 2022;14:597–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Kozlov M. Monkeypox goes global: why scientists are on alert. Nature. 2022;606:15–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Melendez-Rosado J, Thompson KM, Cowdell JC, Alvarez CS, Ung RL, Villanueva A, Jeffers KB, Imam JS, Mitkov MV, Kaleem TA. Reducing unnecessary testing: an intervention to improve resident ordering practices. Postgrad Med J. 2017;93:476–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

There was no specific grant for this research from public, private, or nonprofit funding organizations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Medicine and Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Al-Qunfudah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Safa H. Alkalash

  2. Family Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Menoufia, Egypt

    Safa H. Alkalash, Nagwa A. Farag, Fatma A. Elesrigy & Ayah M. Barakat

  3. Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Damietta Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Damietta, Egypt

    Marzouk M. Marzouk

  4. College of Applied Medical Sciences in Alnamas, University of Bisha, Bisha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Faransa A. Ahmed

  5. Pediatric Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt

    Faransa A. Ahmed

  6. Community Health Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

    Rasha A. Mohamed

  7. College of Applied Medical Sciences, University of Bisha, Bisha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Rasha A. Mohamed

  8. International Islamic Center for Population Studies and Research, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt

    Abeer A. Almowafy

Authors
  1. Safa H. Alkalash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marzouk M. Marzouk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nagwa A. Farag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fatma A. Elesrigy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ayah M. Barakat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Faransa A. Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rasha A. Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Abeer A. Almowafy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.H.A. and A.A.A. conceptualization and study design; provision of research materials; data analysis and interpretation; editing, reviewing, drafting and critically revising the manuscript for important intellectual content, and proofing. M.M.M. and N.A.F. conceptualization and study design; survey design; research materials. F.A.E. data collection and organization; writing initial and final drafts of the article; logistic support. A.M.B. study conception; survey design; data acquisition; editing of the manuscript. F.A.A. survey design; data acquisition; editing of the manuscript. M.M.M and A.A.A. design of tools for data collection; data collection; editing of the manuscript. A.A.A: conceptualization and study design. S.H.A. and R.A.M. drafting and editing of the manuscript, final approval of the latest version submitted and design of tools for data collection; data acquisition. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abeer A. Almowafy.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. Ethical approval was obtained from the ethical committee at the International Islamic Center for Population Studies and Research, Al-Azhar University (IRB no: 49/2022), about the study’s purpose and their participation was entirely voluntary and not-for-profit. This study was conducted with concerned authorities from the hospitals in Egypt (El Dakahlia Governorate). On the first page of the questionnaire, electronic written informed consent from the participants was obtained. The researchers devised and kept their own code numbers. The study ensured data confidentiality by keeping participants’ information anonymous.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alkalash, S.H., Marzouk, M.M., Farag, N.A. et al. Evaluation of human monkeypox knowledge and beliefs regarding emerging viral infections among healthcare workers. Int J Emerg Med 16, 75 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-023-00547-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-023-00547-4

Keywords

International Journal of Emergency Medicine

ISSN: 1865-1380

Contact us