The sample populace had the typical number of studies towards HPV from thirteen.six +/? dos.0 (95% CI thirteen.2–13.9) towards the a level from 20. There were significant differences in knowledge with respect to the number of training (You = 425.5; p = 0.004). Background training on HPV was highest for the category with high school-college education as compared to primary-no degree. No differences in knowledge were discovered due to ages (U = 1442.0; p = 0.150) otherwise relationship updates (U = 1450.0; p = 0.122).
The fresh regularity out-of problems considering HPV strain is shown inside Contour 2A. Of one’s complete sample populace, 65.0% was defined as HPV self-confident with forty two.1% of your own society identified as infected with high-risk HPV. Into selection of clients with HPV, 75.6% off attacks corresponded so you’re able to a premier-chance genotype and you may 74.3% of one’s people have been recognized for coinfections having multiple HPV stresses (forty eight.3% of full attempt people). Some coinfected female exhibited around 8 some other genotypes.
The remaining details provided: this from which the fresh fellow member became sexually productive (X 2 = step 3,234; p = 0
Figure dos. (A) Volume research regarding HPV disease in women based on degree of risk, Cuenca, Ecuador; 2019. n=120 lr (reasonable chance)-HPV six, 11, 42, 43, 49, 81 (CP8304). ir (undetermined chance)-HPV 26, 34, forty, 54, 55, 57, 61, 67, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 82, 83, 84. hours (high risk)-HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 39, forty five, 51, 52, 53, 56, 58, 59, 66, 68. (B) Volume research from HPV issues in women centered on years; Cuenca, Ecuador; 2019. n=120. (C) Regularity analysis out-of hr HPV genotypes in women; Cuenca, Ecuador; 2019. n=120.
Even though the groups of feminine aged 56–65 and 30–45 years old got a higher proportion out of HPV bacterial infections (Contour 2B), the newest Z sample review to possess ratio are struggling to expose significant differences when considering age range (p > 0.050). There can be zero relationship anywhere between age groups and HPV problems (X 2 = dos.746; p = 0.432).
New regularity shipping of one’s hrHPV stresses was shown inside Profile 2C. The most typical genotype try hrHPV 18, followed by genotypes 52, 66, 35, and you will 51 (X dos = 7.234; p = 0.041). HPV 16 had a reduced regularity regarding problems throughout the classification learnt.
step 3.dos. Acting out-of HPV problems
Desk 2. HPV disease according to Parity, Cigarette practices, Level of sexual lovers, Birth control and you can Immunosuppression symptoms in women away from Cuenca Ecuador, 2019.
If you’re overall no organization are receive between HPV infection and you may condom play with, whenever accounting getting relationship reputation, people who were solitary or in common law unions, condom fool around with was with the all the way down infectivity (Fisher’s X dos = 5.852; p = 0.026; V Cramer = ? 0.293; p = 0.016). To have hitched female, this relationship was not found (X 2 = step one.231; p = 0.412).
357), information about HPV (X dos = 0.261; p = 0.610), gynecological medical care (X 2 = 0.141; p = 0.708), host to home (X dos = 0.369; p = 0.562), studies top (X dos = 0.188; p = 0.664), alcohol based drinks (X dos = 0.669; p = 0.413), age hot sexy young guyanese girls range (X dos = 2.033; p = 0.362), earlier STIs (X dos = step one.553; p = 0.276), regularity regarding sexual intercourse (X 2 = 0.701; p = 0.441), and you can relationship position (X dos = step one.528; p = 0.250). They certainly were not for the HPV issues from the take to learned.
Binary logistic regression verified an association between parity, immunosuppression episodes, access to dental contraceptives/IUDs, and you can positive HPV infection. All of those other parameters had been omitted with the reduced analytical advantages (p > 0.050) or reduced predictive stamina with a low-tall Otherwise. Zero confounding or interaction parameters was in fact located. The features of your own model received by binary logistic regression are found inside the Desk 3.