Table 1 Extent of Self-Medication of Antibiotics Practices in Terms Of Conditions Items Weighted Mean 1. Respiratory Infections 3.

20 Highly Practice 2. Systemic Manifestations 2.71 Highly Practice 3. Gastrointestinal Problems 4. Skin Wounds 2.05 2.98 Low Practice Highly Practice 4th 2nd 3rd 1st Interpretation Rank

Based on the findings on Table 1, Respiratory infections was ranked first with a weighted mean of 3.20 and interpreted as highly practiced with regards to respondents extent of SMA of antibiotics practices in terms of conditions. Ranked second was the condition of skin wounds with a weighted mean of 2.98. Moreover, systematic manifestations was ranked third with a weighted mean of 2.71 and interpreted as highly practiced. Consequently, Gastrointestinal Problems was ranked last (wtd =2.05), and interpreted as low practiced in terms of condition of SMA of antibiotics. The above results conveyed that majority of the respondents self-medicates with antibiotics when they suffer from respiratory infections (runny nose, nasal congestion, cough, sore throat), systemic infections (fever, aches and pains), and skin wounds rather than when they are suffering from gastrointestinal problems (vomiting, diarrhea, stomach ache). This is because of the Filipino culture whereas they approach their health symptomatically which means they view their self as healthy individuals if they are not experiencing any symptoms of any illness. In addition to that, they usually treat their conditions specifically respiratory infections, systemic manifestations and skin wounds with antibiotics rather than gastrointestinal problems which are frequently treated by home remedies or herbal medicines. Filipinos are also greatly influenced by

the different forms of media (television, radio, newspaper) with regards to selfmedication of antibiotics according to their condition. They are using medications that they have constantly seeing or hearing from televisions, radios and so forth and they are applying it to their condition.

Table 2 Anova Results on the Significant Difference on SMA Practices on Conditions When grouped According to Highest Educational Attainment Anova 1.Respiratory Infections 4.83 p-Value .01 Decision Reject the null hypothesis 2.Systemic Manifestations .41 .66 Accept the null hypothesis 3.Gastrointestinal Problems 2.53 .08 Accept the null hypothesis 4.Skin Wounds 1.26 .28 Accept the null hypothesis Interpretation There is a significant difference There is no significant difference There is no significant difference There is no significant difference

Based on the findings on Table 2, it shows that there is no significant differences on SMA practices on condition with regards to Systemic Manifestations (F=0.41, pvalue=0.66), Gastrointestinal Problems (F=2.53, p-value=0.08), and Skin wounds (F=1.26, p-value=0.28) when grouped according to Highest Educational Attainment. But, the findings on Respiratory Infections with p-value of 0.01 and F value of 4.83 showed there is a significant relationship, hence, reject the null hypothesis.

Post Hoc Tukey Respiratory Infections vs Education Variables High School Mean 2.90 3.49 College P - Value 0.02 Interpretation There is a significant difference

In the Post Hoc Test using Tukey, high school graduate was significantly different from the college graduate with a p-value of 0.02. This result signifies that the respondents who have reached college level have a very high practice in self-medication of antibiotics with regards to respiratory infections compared to respondents who have reached high school level. Since college level individuals have sufficient knowledge regarding their condition and the medication they should take, with regards to this an increased knowledge means increased confidence to self-medicate unlike in high school level respondents.

Table 3 Anova Results on the Significant Difference on SMA Practices on Conditions When grouped According to Monthly Family Income Anova 1.Respiratory Infections 4.37 p-Value .006 Decision Reject null hypothesis 2.Systemic Manifestations 1.51 .21 Accept null hypothesis 3.Gastrointestinal 2.89 Problems .03 Reject null hypothesis 4.Skin Wounds .833 .47 Accept null hypothesis Interpretation the There is a

significant difference

the There is no significant difference is a

the There

significant difference

the There is no significant difference

Table 3 shows that there is no significant difference in the respondents SMA practices in terms of conditions such as Systemic manifestations (F=1.51, p-value=0.21) and skin wounds (F=0.833, p-value=0.47) when grouped according to monthly income. On the other hand, it was found out that there is a significant difference in the respondents SMA practices in terms of conditions when it comes to re spiratory infections (F=4.37, p-value=0.006).

Post Hoc Tukey Respiratory Infections vs Monthly Family Income Variables Category D Mean 3.67 2.92 Category E p value 0.008 Interpretation There is a significant difference.

Using Tukey in a Post Hoc Test, it was found out that there is a significant difference between Category D and Category E with a p value of 0.008. Results from the Post Hoc Test with the use of Tukey shows Post Hoc Tukey Gastrointesinal Problems vs Monthly Family Income Variables Category D Mean 2.40 1.83 Category E p value 0.05 Interpretation There is a significant difference