Table 1Characteristics of the survey respondents.
Characteristics |
n
|
% |
Gender |
Male |
210 |
20.63 |
Female |
808 |
79.37 |
|
Age (y) |
≤ 30 |
30 |
2.94 |
31 – 59 |
897 |
88.11 |
≥ 60 |
91 |
8.95 |
Table 2The social roles of the survey respondents.
Social roles |
n
|
% |
- Head of sub-district |
15 |
1.47 |
- Social welfare staff to sub-district |
15 |
1.47 |
- Head of PHC |
37 |
3.63 |
- Staff of diseases prevention and control of PHC |
33 |
3.24 |
- Head of village |
141 |
13.85 |
- Social welfare staff to village |
140 |
13.75 |
- Dengue vector observer to village |
28 |
2.75 |
- Leader of FWC of sub-village |
141 |
13.85 |
- Dengue vector observer to sub-village |
101 |
9.92 |
- Head of FWC to Neighborhood Association |
163 |
16.01 |
- Dengue vector observer of Neighborhood Association |
109 |
10.71 |
- Headmaster |
95 |
9.33 |
Total |
1,018 |
100.00 |
Table 3The evaluation of the community perception to Dengue virus control in the Semarang municipality.
Evaluated-aspects |
n
|
% |
Dengue cases in the last 3 years |
- Decreasing |
821 |
80.6 |
- Stable |
156 |
15.3 |
- Increasing |
22 |
2.2 |
- Do not know |
19 |
1.9 |
|
Community attention to the problems associated with Dengue virus |
- Increasing |
955 |
93.8 |
- Stable |
58 |
5.7 |
- Decreasing |
3 |
0.3 |
- Do not know |
2 |
0.2 |
|
Existence of Dengue control activities by community |
- Exist |
1,015 |
99.7 |
- Not exist |
3 |
0.3 |
|
Community participation to Dengue virus control activities |
- Better |
976 |
95.9 |
- Stable |
39 |
3.8 |
- Do not know |
3 |
0.3 |
|
Dengue virus vector monitoring by community (last 3 years) |
- Consistent |
1,015 |
99.7 |
- Inconsistent |
3 |
0.3 |
|
Dengue virus vector monitoring activities (last 3 years) |
- Being done routinely |
997 |
98.2 |
- Being done intermittently |
16 |
1.6 |
- Do not know |
2 |
0.2 |
|
Rate of Dengue virus vector free residential areas (last 3 years) |
- Increasing |
929 |
91.3 |
- Stable |
68 |
6.7 |
- Decreasing |
12 |
1.1 |
- Do not know |
9 |
0.9 |
Table 4The evaluation of perception by the community to DSWs and their activities.
Evaluated-aspects of DSWs and their activities |
n
|
% |
Understand the presence of DSWs in institution or residential |
- Yes |
1,010 |
99.2 |
- No |
2 |
0.2 |
- Do not know |
6 |
0.6 |
|
DSWs play a role in increasing the community attention to Dengue |
- Yes |
990 |
98.0 |
- No |
16 |
1.6 |
- Do not know |
4 |
0.4 |
|
DSWs play a role in community participation to Dengue control program |
- Yes |
980 |
97.0 |
- No |
27 |
2.7 |
- Do not know |
3 |
0.3 |
|
DSWs play a role in increasing the rate of Dengue-vector free residential |
- Yes |
994 |
98.4 |
- No |
15 |
1.5 |
- Do not know |
1 |
0.1 |
|
DSWs play a role in reduction the Dengue occurrence |
- Yes |
985 |
97.5 |
- No |
20 |
2.0 |
- Do not know |
5 |
0.5 |
|
DSWs are needed in the years ahead |
- Yes |
995 |
98.5 |
- No |
9 |
0.9 |
- Do not know |
6 |
0.6 |
Table 5The Communities’ expectations of the DSWs in the years ahead in the Semarang municipality.
Social role of respondent |
DSWs are needed in the years ahead |
|
Yes |
No |
Abstain |
|
|
|
n
|
% |
n
|
% |
n
|
% |
Government officers |
372 |
98.9 |
4 |
1.1 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
General members of the community |
623 |
98.3 |
5 |
0.8 |
6 |
0.9 |
|
Total |
995 |
98.5 |
9 |
0.9 |
6 |
0.6 |
Table 6The community perception towards DSWs knowledge, attitude, and abilities in implementing tasks.
Evaluated-aspects |
n
|
% |
DSWs’ Knowledge of Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever |
- Very good |
26 |
2.6 |
- Good |
977 |
96.7 |
- Poor |
7 |
0.7 |
|
Understanding of DSWs to the service areas |
- Very good |
35 |
3.5 |
- Good |
964 |
95.4 |
- Poor |
11 |
1.1 |
|
Maturation of DSWs attitude in related their works |
- Mature |
1,000 |
99.0 |
- Less mature |
10 |
1.0 |
|
Confidentiality of DSWs in community service |
- Confidence |
996 |
98.6 |
- Less confidence |
14 |
1.4 |
|
DSWs Dexterousness in larval surveys |
- Skillful |
999 |
98.9 |
- Less skillful |
11 |
1.1 |
|
Presenting of DSWs in Dengue virus control activities by communities |
- Always |
967 |
95.8 |
- Frequent |
31 |
3.1 |
- Rare |
12 |
1.1 |
|
Ability of DSWs in Dengue virus control campaign |
- Very good |
21 |
2.1 |
- Good |
974 |
96.4 |
- Poor |
15 |
1.5 |
|
Ability of DSWs in community approach |
- Very good |
30 |
3.0 |
- Good |
970 |
95.9 |
- Poor |
11 |
1.1 |
|
Motivating ability of DSWs to community |
- Very good |
22 |
2.7 |
- Good |
801 |
96.0 |
- Poor |
11 |
1.3 |
|
DSWs attention to Dengue problem in community |
- Very good |
987 |
97.8 |
- Good |
20 |
2.0 |
- Poor |
3 |
0.2 |
|
Seriousness of DSWs in advocating community |
- Very good |
823 |
98.7 |
- Good |
9 |
1.1 |
- Poor |
2 |
0.2 |
|
Presenting of invited people to the Dengue forum held by DSWs |
- Almost 100% |
24 |
2.4 |
- More than 50% |
955 |
94.6 |
- Less than 50% |
31 |
3.0 |
Table 7Community acceptance and satisfaction in the performance of the DSWs.
Evaluated-aspects |
n
|
% |
Community acceptability to DSWs |
- Very good |
60 |
5.9 |
- Good |
943 |
93.4 |
- Poor |
7 |
0.7 |
|
Satisfaction of participant to DSWs performance |
- High |
111 |
10.9 |
- Medium |
886 |
87.0 |
- Low |
21 |
2.1 |