Use of medicinal plants for COVID-19 prevention and respiratory symptom treatment during the pandemic in Cusco, Peru: A cross-sectional survey

  1. Magaly Villena-Tejada
  2. Ingrid Vera-Ferchau
  3. Anahí Cardona-Rivero
  4. Rina Zamalloa-Cornejo
  5. Maritza Quispe-Florez
  6. Zany Frisancho-Triveño
  7. Rosario C. Abarca-Meléndez
  8. Susan G. Alvarez-Sucari
  9. Christian R. Mejia
  10. Jaime A. Yañez

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in Peru has led to people seeking alternative treatments as preventives and treatment options such as medicinal plants. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of medicinal plants as preventive or treatment of respiratory symptom related to COVID-19 during the pandemic in Cusco, Peru.

Method

A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted on general public (20- to 70-year-old) from August 31 to September 20, 2020. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire via Google Forms, it consisted of an 11-item questionnaire that was developed and validated by expert judgment using Aiken’s V (Aiken’s V > 0.9). Both descriptive statistics and bivariate followed by multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess factors associated with the use of medicinal plants for COVID-19 prevention and respiratory symptom treatment during the pandemic. Prevalence ratios (PR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI), and a P-value of 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance.

Results

A total of 1,747 respondents participated in the study, 80.2% reported that they used medicinal plants as preventives, while 71% reported that they used them to treat respiratory symptoms. At least, 24% of respondents used medicinal plants when presenting with two or more respiratory symptoms, while at least 11% used plants for malaise. For treatment or prevention, the multivariate analysis showed that most respondents used eucalyptus (p < 0.001 for both), ginger (p < 0.022 for both), spiked pepper (p < 0.003 for both), garlic (p = 0.023 for prevention), and chamomile (p = 0.011 for treatment). The respondents with COVID-19 (p < 0.001), at older ages (p = 0.046), and with a family member or friend who had COVID-19 (p < 0.001) used more plants for prevention. However, the respondents with technical or higher education used less plants for treatment (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

There was a significant use of medicinal plants for both prevention and treatment, which was associated with several population characteristics and whether respondents had COVID-19.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0257165
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.05.26.21257890: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethical considerations: The survey was approved by the San Antonio Abad del Cusco National University ethics committee (#007-2020-CBI-UNSAAC).
    Consent: All the survey participants were well-versed on the study intentions and were required to consent before the enrollment.
    Sex as a biological variableWe surveyed general public who were adults of both genders aged 20 to 70 years in five districts of Cusco, Peru with high-risk COVID-19 transmission according to the Epidemiological Alert AE- 017-2020 (44).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power AnalysisIt was determined that a minimum sample size of 1,530 was necessary to achieve a minimum percentage difference of 2.5% (49.0% versus 51.5%), a statistical power of 80%, and a confidence level of 95% (data not shown).

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Outcomes and Covariates: The survey (Annex 1) included 11 questions, 5 were demographic questions, 2 were related to the use of medicinal plants as preventive or treatment of respiratory symptoms related to COVID-19, 2 were related to the diagnosis of COVID-19 in themselves and the close environment (family and friends), and the last 2 questions related to the medicinal plants were used and to what respiratory symptom(s) they were used for.
    Covariates
    suggested: None
    Statistical analysis: Data analysis was done in STATA version 14
    STATA
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.05.26.21257890v1 on medRxiv