Figure 1. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 1. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 2. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 2. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 3. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 3. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 4. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 4. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 5. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 5. Wearing a protective mask that covers the mouth and nose to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 6. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 6. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 7. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 7. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 8. Hand washing as a means of preventing influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 8. Hand washing as a means of preventing influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 9. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 9. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 10. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 10. Hand washing to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 11. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 11. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 12. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 12. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 13. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 13. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 14. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 14. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 15. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 15. Influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 16. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 16. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 17. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 17. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 18. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 18. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 19. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 19. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 20. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 20. Avoiding contact with sick people to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 21. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 21. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 22. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 22. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 23. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 23. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 24. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 24. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 25. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 25. Eating garlic to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 26. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 26. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by gender (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 27. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 27. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by age (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 28. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 28. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by type of hospital (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 29. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 29. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by profession (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 30. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 30. Taking preparations with inosine to prevent influenza virus infection by seniority (N = 905). * Sum of responses: completely ineffective, ineffective, rather ineffective; ** Response: neither ineffective nor effective; *** Sum of responses: rather effective, effective, completely effective.

Figure 38. Attitudes toward influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated against influenza (N = 950). Note. TIN-totally ineffective, IN-ineffective, RIN-rather ineffective, NINE-neither ineffective nor effective, RE-rather effective, E-effective, TE-totally effective.

Figure 38. Attitudes toward influenza vaccination to prevent influenza virus infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated against influenza (N = 950). Note. TIN-totally ineffective, IN-ineffective, RIN-rather ineffective, NINE-neither ineffective nor effective, RE-rather effective, E-effective, TE-totally effective.

Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics (N = 950).

Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics (N = 950).

VariablesN (%)GenderFemale807 (84.9)Male143 (15.1)Age18–30221 (23.3)31–40206 (21.7)41–50234 (24.6)51–60221 (23.3)>6068 (7.1)Type of hospitalAdult hospital422 (44.4)Pediatric hospital528 (55.6)ProfessionPhysician306 (32.2)Nurse456 (48.0)Other188 (19.8)Seniority<5 y.245 (25.8)6–20 y.217 (22.8)>20 y.389 (40.9)Refuse to answer99 (10.5)

Table 2. Evaluation of the effectiveness of methods to prevent influenza infections (N = 950).

Table 2. Evaluation of the effectiveness of methods to prevent influenza infections (N = 950).

MeanSEMDORPercentilesThe Indicated Degree of Effectiveness of the Method to Prevent Influenza Virus Infection *25th50th75thMask covering mouth and nose5.080.0585.001.7964.005.007.00 Hand washing5.880.0517.001.5645.007.007.00 Influenza vaccination4.840.0645.001.9704.005.007.00 Avoiding contact with sick people5.670.0566.001.7315.006.007.00 Eating garlic2.770.0572.001.7691.002.004.00 Taking preparations with inosine2.610.0522.001.6101.002.004.00 Taking vitamin C daily3.120.0613.001.8881.003.004.00

Table 3. Evaluation of mouth and nose covering mask to prevent influenza virus infection by sociodemographic category (N = 950).

Table 3. Evaluation of mouth and nose covering mask to prevent influenza virus infection by sociodemographic category (N = 950).

VariablesMean95% CISEMDORχ2dfp-ValueGenderFemale5.054.92–5.180.0655.001.8368.25160.220Male5.234.98–5.490.1295.001.546Age18–305.054.83–5.260.1115.001.64541.541240.01531–405.114.87–5.350.1125.001.74841–505.064.83–5.290.1185.001.80351–605.164.91–5.420.1255.001.863>604.884.36–5.410.2625.002.162Type of hospitalAdult hospital4.934.75–5.120.0935.001.90813.16260.041Pediatric hospital5.195.05–5.340.0745.001.694ProfessionPhysicians5.435.27–5.590.0826.001.44353.77612<0.001Nurses4.884.70–5.060.0915.001.939Others4.994.72–5.260.1375.001.876Seniority<5 y.5.194.98–5.400.4816.001.64938.867180.0036–20 y.5.014.77–5.240.1205.001.761>20 y.5.104.91–5.290.0965.001.903Refuse to answer4.874.51–5.230.1805.001.788

Table 4. Evaluation of handwashing as a means of preventing influenza virus infection by sociodemographic category (N = 950).

Table 4. Evaluation of handwashing as a means of preventing influenza virus infection by sociodemographic category (N = 950).

VariablesMean95% CISEMDORχ2dfp-ValueGenderFemale5.895.78–6.000.0557.001.5626.75960.334Male5.805.54–6.060.1326.001.577Age18–305.995.82–6.150.0846.001.24976.02624<0.00131–405.875.67–6.070.1016.001.45641–505.895.68–6.100.3377.001.64551–605.865.64–6.080.1127.001.660>605.514.99–6.030.2607.002.147Type of hospitalAdult hospital5.78