Factors associated with the use of pseudoscientific treatments in the central highlands of Peru during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study

Objective. The objective of this study was to establish the factors associated with the use of pseudoscientific treatments in a sample of adults from Huanuco city, in the central highlands of Peru, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. It is an observational, cross-sectional, and analytical study. It was carried out in Huanuco city during the months of February to April. The data collection was done through a validated survey. Four categories of pseudoscientific treatments were analyzed which were crossed according to the established symptoms. Results. It was established that among the 363 surveyed, there is an association between the use of pseudoscientific treatments and that the surveyed thought that he or she may have or have had COVID-19; that is to say, used more pseudoscientific treatments those who did not know if they had been infected or were asymptomatic (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.41; 95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 1.68; p<0.001), those who had symptoms but no a confirmatory test (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.73; 95% confidence interval: 1.46 to 2.05; p-value <0.001) and those who had confirmed COVID-19 (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.37 to 1.88; p-value <0.001). Approximately four out of ten used these treatments preventively (37.9%), especially with non-pharmacological methods. The surveyed who consumed more pseudotherapies were the older ones (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.006; 95% confidence interval: 1.001 to 1.011; p value=0.030), those who had a sentimental partner (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.33; 95% confidence interval: 1.16 to 1.52; p value <0.001), those who worked in the education sector (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.28; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 1.58; p value=0.028) and those who had asthma (Adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.27; 95% confidence interval: 1.04 to 1.55; p value=0.018). Finally, the most important information source were family/friends (76.4%) and health personnel (58.7%), for non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, respectively. Conclusions. The general population uses different types of treatments without scientific evidence due to the excessive transmission of false information and the easy access to information about these pseudotherapies. In addition, the population of the highlands with jungle influences consume pseudotherapies more frequently due to their geographical location and cultural roots. There is a relationship between the possibility of disease and the use of pseudoscientific treatments because an association was found between the consumption of pseudotherapies and those who thought they had the disease and those who had confirmed it. Being the consumption either to treat the symptoms, to prevent them, or both. Healthy people self-medicated, consumed, and practiced pseudotherapies, not to treat, but to prevent the symptoms of the infection.