Factors Influencing Occupational Stress of State Security Forces During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this review was to assess the factors influencing the occupational stress of state security forces during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases, adhering to the PRISMA statement standards and the guidelines for narrative syntheses.

Results: We included a total of 26 studies. The prevalence of stress varied from 22% to 87.2%. Factors that may have influenced the stress levels of police officers during the pandemic include not having basic personal protective equipment, having little or no rest periods between tasks, long working hours, fear of contagion to themselves or others, pressure to maintain law and order, emotion regulation and preparedness, sex, marital status, work experience, age, presence of chronic underlying illnesses, family-work conflict, lack of psychological support, and others. The long working hours, the fear of infecting themselves or others, the pressure to maintain law and order, sex, and age are the six main factors evaluated for more studies.

Conclusion: Organisational, situational, and personal factors may have influenced the stress levels of police officers during the pandemic, and measures need to be taken to minimise their impact.

Introduction

The pandemic situation caused by COVID-19 has posed significant and unprecedented challenges to police forces worldwide.¹ Police officers were responsible for enforcing the rules and other public health measures implemented during the lockdown aimed at curbing the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The unpredictable nature of the situation and the uncertainty about the control and/or potential danger of the disease subjected police officers to considerable psychological pressure in addition to the health-related dangers.^1,2

Police officers faced a multitude of risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic that could potentially impact their well-being. These included the constant possibility of infection, frequent changes in government guidelines and adjustments in police protocols, a highly stressful work environment, and working under exceptional conditions.³

An individual’s response to internal and external threats and challenges, which can cause major changes in their physical and mental state, is known as stress.⁴ Both the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping by Lazarus et al⁵ and the General Strain Theory by Agnew⁶ offer a valuable perspective for understanding the stress experienced by police officers during the pandemic. According to these theories, stress arises when individuals perceive a discrepancy between the demands of the environment and their coping resources in a particular situation. The individual assesses the level of stress resulting from environmental demands, known as stressors, and evaluates the own availability and effectiveness of coping resources to meet these demands. In the case of police officers, stressors such as the risk of infection and additional workload frequently exceeded their available resources, leading to a state of negative stress, accompanied by fatigue and impaired mood.^7,8

Some authors have classified possible stressors as either organisational (caused by the police administration and management) or inherent to the job (derived from the performance of their duties). In contrast, other authors have distinguished four groups according to the sources of risk, including management, task performance, community or context, and the judicial system.⁹

During the pandemic, police officers encountered new stressful situations in addition to the ones they have always encountered.¹⁰ Firstly, the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has become a constant threat to one’s own health and, particularly, the health of family and friends. Furthermore, the introduction of new protocols and the implementation of new social norms caused many people to react against authority in times of pandemic.^3,11 At the same time, the initial phase of the pandemic was characterised by a shortage of personal protective equipment and a continuous adjustment of working hours due to contagions and rotations. Changes in the working team, a certain degree of social isolation, the need to quickly adapt to changing procedures, the limited availability of work permits, and the threat of being assaulted, among others, increased the workload and stress among the officers.^11–13 Possible manifestations of high levels of stress include headaches, frustration, digestive disorders, fatigue, difficulty in interpersonal relationships, or insomnia.^14,15 Other professionals, such as health professionals, were afraid to work and faced personal and family risks due to the possibility of contracting the virus. Despite this, just as with police officers, their commitment and dedication motivated them to offer the best care possible.¹⁶ Consequently, prolonged and intense stress resulting from a high-risk environment, high-intensity work demands, and a high workload can potentially lead to more serious mental health issues such as depression, substance abuse, and suicide.

It is necessary to evaluate the stress experienced by police officers during the COVID-19 pandemic, as this was a frontline group that faced the virus and suffered a significant rise in their workload, having to fulfil both their regular duties and new responsibilities related to enforcing public health measures. This situation, combined with uncertainty and prolonged exposure to high-risk environments, likely had a considerable impact on their mental health, manifesting in high levels of stress, anxiety, and exhaustion. Evaluating this issue is crucial not only to protect the well-being of officers but also to ensure an adequate response to future public health emergencies or similar crises. Thus, it is crucial to implement protection and prevention mechanisms aimed at these occupational groups.¹⁷

As a result, this review aimed to assess the factors influencing the occupational stress of state security forces during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Study Design

A scoping review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for scoping reviews.¹⁸ We then followed the guidelines set out by Popay et al¹⁹ to carry out a narrative synthesis. This framework consists of four main principles: 1) Developing a theory of the stressors faced by state security forces during the COVID-19 pandemic; 2) Developing a preliminary synthesis of the findings across the included studies; 3) Exploring the relationships between the sets of data; and 4) Assessing the robustness of the synthesis.

Databases and Search Strategy

Using the Condition, Context, Population (CoCoPop) strategy²⁰ (Table 1), we conducted the search in the Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases based on the keywords that the research question yielded.

Table 1 CoCoPop Format: Keywords

Based on these keywords, the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) thesaurus was consulted, yielding the following descriptors: Police, Psychological Distress, Psychological Stress, and COVID-19. We used related terms to complete the search strategy based on the MeSH descriptors (Table 2), linking them with Boolean operators and/or to enhance the number of published studies related to the study’s subject.

Table 3 shows the search strategy used, carried out on 05 April 2024 in each of the databases mentioned above during the search process.

Table 2 Terms Used in the Search

Table 3 Search Strategy

Selection Criteria

The following criteria were used for the selection of the articles:

Inclusion Criteria

Type: original articles, and meta-analyses.

Population: state security forces.

Idiomatic criteria: all languages.

Studies where data collection took place from 1 January 2020 to 5 May 2023 (date on which the WHO decreed the end of the international emergency for COVID-19).

Articles measuring any of the following values and/or effects: Stress levels and/or main stressors.

Exclusion Criteria

Type: opinion articles, editorials, and letters to the editor/publisher.

Studies of low scientific-technical quality after applying the quality assessment tool.

Population: Non-military and not in off-duty situations.

Articles that did not answer the research question and were not related to the objective of the review.

Data Collection and Extraction

Two researchers independently conducted searches, eliminated duplicate studies, and selected articles for inclusion after reading the abstract and title, according to the criteria set out above. To do this, descriptive summaries were drafted for each of the studies, including all relevant information from the data extraction sheet: details of the studies, context (date of data collection), study objective, study type, participants, methods, main findings, and quality, which would also help to explore preliminary relationships within and across studies. A thematic analysis approach was used to systematically identify the main, recurring and most important topics across multiple studies.

Subsequently, these same two authors reviewed the full text of the studies potentially eligible for inclusion in the review, and the decision to include or exclude studies in the review was made by consensus. The discrepancies were resolved by a third author.

Methodological Quality Assessment

The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) at the University of Adelaide tools were used.²¹ These tools make it possible to assess the methodological quality of a study and to determine the extent to which a study has excluded or minimised the possibility of bias in its design, conduct, and/or analysis. The versions for analytical cross-sectional studies (8 items), for qualitative research (10 items), and for Case-Control Studies (10 items) were used, setting the cut-off point at 6 to be accepted for inclusion in this review for the first, and 8 for the second and the third (Table S1–S3).

Results

The initial search strategy identified a total of 572 references, which were then screened according to the objective of this review. A total of 26 studies were finally selected (Figure 1). All these 26 studies have been compiled in Table 4.

Figure 1 Search flow diagram.

Table 4 Characteristics of the Studies Included in the Review

According to the setting, the 19% (n=5) of the studies were conducted in China^{22,26,27,33,45} and another 19% (n=5) in India;^{23,24,37,44,46} 8% (n=2) of the studies were conducted in Spain^9,34 and another 8% (n=2) in Taiwan;^38,42 the remaining countries in which studies were carried out were Mexico;³¹ Nepal;³⁰ Turkey;³² Norway;²⁸ Wales;²⁹ Greece;³⁵ Singapore;³⁶ Hong Kong;⁴⁷ Nigeria;⁴³ USA;⁴¹ Serbia;³⁹ and a multicentre study in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Spain.²⁵

All but three of the selected studies were quantitative descriptive cross-sectional studies^23,41,43 and one was a case-control study.³⁵ Similarly, in all the studies, the sample consisted of police officers except for the study by Dey et al,²⁴ in which police officers were engaged in specific traffic activities. Also, in the study by Langvik et al,²⁸ there was a part of the sample of police officers who worked entirely/partly from home. In the study by Kukić et al,³⁹ the sample consisted of police officers in training.

Among the most frequently used instruments were the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) in its various versions and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales (DASS-21), which were applied in multiple contexts to assess the emotional and psychological impact on participants. Other validated scales such as the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), including its human services survey version (MBI-HSS), the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10 and K6), the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), among others, were also used.

The prevalence of stress varied widely across the studies, ranging from 22% to 87.2%. Factors that increased stress levels included: lack of basic personal protective equipment,^9,34 having hardly any rest periods between tasks,²³ long working hours,^24,26,32,43 fear of infecting themselves or others,^{24,25,30,32–34,38,39,41–43} the pressure to maintain law and order,^{24,30,32,42,43} sex,^{25,26,30,39,46} marital status,^30,45 level of education,^33,45 work experience,^25,33 age,^{26,30,37,45,46} xenophobia,³⁰ emotion regulation and preparedness,^25,27 poor communication and/or training,^25,32 the presence of underlying chronic diseases,^26,33 recently having been infected or having had close contact with the disease,³³ lack of psychological support,²⁷ reduced interaction with co-workers,²⁸ perceived quality of life,³¹ sleep quality,^33,42,46 self-perceived health,³⁴ levels of engagement,^34,44 coping styles,³⁹ turnover intention,⁴⁰ work-family conflict,⁴⁰ policies,⁴² and physical activity.⁴³

Finally, in some studies, police officers felt that they did not need psychological support.^22,32

Discussion

The goal of this review was to evaluate the stressors that could affect stress levels in state security forces while performing their duties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Firstly, it was found that the prevalence of stress varied widely in the reviewed studies, ranging from 22% to 87.2%. This could imply that while stress is a prevalent issue, its magnitude can significantly fluctuate based on the study’s context and the unique working conditions involved.⁴⁸

Various structural, organisational, situational, and personal elements have been identified as stressors. Lack of basic personal protective equipment^9,34 is a variable that can cause stress to officers, as same as to other professionals such as healthcare workers,⁴⁹ in many cases for fear of contracting the disease due to the absence of protective equipment.^{24,25,30,32–34,38,39,41–43}

Moreover, police officers’ duties include ensuring the safety and order of the population, and this can lead to exacerbated stress as they try to maintain law and order,²⁴ especially when part of the population may be against the movement restrictions imposed by some governments.⁵⁰ Long working hours^24,26,32,43 and the lack of adequate rest periods between tasks should be considered.²³ Police work is unpredictable, and during the pandemic, the number of working days or shifts may have been increased to cover for colleagues who have become infected.⁵¹ These findings highlight the importance of working conditions and the need to ensure that a safe and appropriate working environment is in place to reduce stress.

In terms of personal factors, there were some discrepancies between the studies. While for Q. Huang et al²⁶ and Grover et al³⁷ being over 45 years of age was a potential factor for stress, for Rajbhandari et al³⁰ the most predisposed group was the 18–27 age group, and for Ravikumar⁴⁴ occupational stress was not affected by age. Other studies in the general population suggest that older age may be associated with higher levels of stress, although further concomitant factors may play a role.⁵² In this sense, other variables such as being male and single were factors that might predispose to stress, yet no statistically significant differences were found.³⁷ Conversely, in the study by Ravikumar,⁴⁴ occupational stress did not vary by marital status or age. On the other hand, in the studies,^25,26,30,39 sex significantly predicted stress, with women being more likely to suffer stress than men, as in other exceptional situations.⁵³ Years of experience also play an important role in coping with new situations, and some studies have shown that fewer years of experience may increase the stress level related to job maintenance during COVID-19,^25,33 as in a sample of Swedish police officers before the pandemic⁵⁴ These factors suggest that stress is not only influenced by working conditions but also by individual and socio-demographic characteristics.

Other factors assessed in the studies relate to changes in working conditions brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the presence of chronic underlying diseases,^26,33 having less contact with co-workers,²⁸ a lower perceived quality of life,³¹ a decline in sleep quality,^33,42,46 reduced self-perceived health,³⁴ a work-family conflict and vice versa,⁴⁰ which, among others, are equally decisive. Such variety and multiplicity of factors underline the complexity of the stress phenomenon and the need to address it from a multifactorial perspective.¹⁷

Finally, it should be noted that some studies reported individuals believing that they did not need psychological support^22,32 and that for others, it was not even considered.²⁷ In contrast, in the study by Ndubueze,⁴³ psychological support did help. These differing approaches can be a major barrier to implementing effective interventions. It is, therefore, crucial to promote an organisational culture that is accepting and supportive of access to mental health resources and training in coping abilities.

This study is not without limitations. Firstly, the contexts and instruments used to collect the information varied. So, in many cases, knowledge of the setting was necessary to understand the results. In addition, each study was carried out at a different pandemic phase, and the events of counteracting the pandemic were not always comparable across studies. Furthermore, there have been several studies in which it was not possible to collect specific information from police forces. Lastly, the study did not include military personnel because their training and functions differ from those of the police.

Conclusion

This study aimed to evaluate the factors that could affect stress levels in state security forces while performing their duties during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings suggest that the demands imposed by COVID-19 on police officers, which go beyond the standard duty of maintaining law and order, had a considerable psychological impact on them.

It was found that the prevalence of stress varied between different studies, ranging from 22% to 87.2%. Therefore, this was prevalent issue which fluctuated between dates and context.

There was a wide variability of factors that may have had an influence on stress levels during the pandemic, including organisational factors (lack of basic personal protective equipment, lack of resting periods, long working hours or poor communication), pandemic situational factors (fear of contagion, pressure to maintain law and order, emotion coping, between others), and personal factors (mainly, sex, marital status, educational level, work experience, age, chronic illnesses, and family-work conflicts).

There is a vital need for police officers to receive psychological support, implementing strategies to reduce the effects of stress and offering customized psychological therapy and coping tools.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

1. Laufs J, Waseem Z. Policing in pandemics: a systematic review and best practices for police response to COVID-19. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 2020;51:101812. doi:10.1016/J.IJDRR.2020.101812

2. Edwards AM, Kotera Y. Policing in a pandemic: a commentary on officer well-being during COVID-19. J Police Crim Psychol. 2021;36(3):360–364. doi:10.1007/s11896-021-09469-4

3. Stogner J, Miller BL, McLean K. Police Stress, Mental health, and resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am J Crim Justice. 2020;45(4):718–730. doi:10.1007/S12103-020-09548-Y

4. Schneiderman N, Ironson G, Siegel SD. STRESS AND HEALTH: psychological, behavioral, and biological determinants. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1(1):607. doi:10.1146/ANNUREV.CLINPSY.1.102803.144141

5. Lazarus RS, Folkman S, Gentry WD The handbook of behavioral medicine. (Guildford, ed.). Guildford; 1984. Available from:https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=The+handbook+of+Behavioral+medicine&author=R.S.+Lazarus&author=S.+Folkman&publication_year=1984&.AccessedMay31, 2024 .

6. Agnew R. Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology. 1992;30(1):47–88. doi:10.1111/J.1745-9125.1992.TB01093.X

7. Doerr JM, Ditzen B, Strahler J, et al. Reciprocal relationship between acute stress and acute fatigue in everyday life in a sample of university students. Biol Psychol. 2015;110:42–49. doi:10.1016/J.BIOPSYCHO.2015.06.009

8. Giessing L, Frenkel MO, Zinner C, et al. Effects of coping-related traits and psychophysiological stress responses on police recruits’ shooting behavior in reality-based scenarios. Front Psychol. 2019;10. doi:10.3389/FPSYG.2019.01523

9. Gómez-Galán J, Lázaro-Pérez C, Martínez-López JÁ, Fernández-Martínez MM. Burnout in Spanish security forces during the covid-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(23):1–15. doi:10.3390/ijerph17238790

10. Backteman-Erlanson S, Padyab M, Brulin C. Prevalence of burnout and associations with psychosocial work environment, physical strain, and stress of conscience among Swedish female and male police personnel. Police Pract Res. 2013;14(6):491–505. doi:10.1080/15614263.2012.736719

11. Jennings WG, Perez NM. The immediate impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement in the United States. Am J Crimi Justice. 2020;45(4):690. doi:10.1007/S12103-020-09536-2

12. Violanti JM, Charles LE, McCanlies E, et al. Police stressors and health: a state-of-The-art review. Policing. 2017;40(4):642. doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2016-0097

13. Fleming J, Brown J. Staffing the force: police staff in England and Wales’ experiences of working through a COVID-19 lockdown. Police Pract Res. 2022;23(2):236–253. doi:10.1080/15614263.2021.1938048

14. Singh S, Kar SK. Sources of occupational stress in the police personnel of North India: an exploratory study. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2015;19(1):56. doi:10.4103/0019-5278.157012

15. Cieślak I, Kielan A, Olejniczak D, et al. Stress at work: the case of municipal police officers. Work. 2020;65(1):145–152. doi:10.3233/WOR-193067

16. Chaudhary P, Payal N, Nain P, et al. Perceived risk of infection, ethical challenges and motivational factors among frontline nurses in Covid-19 pandemic: prerequisites and lessons for future pandemic. BMC Nurs. 2024;23(1):1–10. doi:10.1186/s12912-023-01653-7

17. Edwards AM, Kotera Y. Mental health in the UK police force: a qualitative investigation into the stigma with mental illness. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2021;19(4):1116–1134. doi:10.1007/S11469-019-00214-X/TABLES/1

18. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021:372.doi:10.1136/BMJ.N71.

19. Popay J, Roberts H, Jennie Popay A, et al. Developing guidance on the developing guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews in systematic reviews. An ESRC Research Methods Programme project; January 2014. Available from: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/shm/research/nssr/research/dissemination/publications/medsocsept05pdf.AccessedNovember14, 2024 .

20. Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should i conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):1–9. doi:10.1186/S12874-017-0468-4/TABLES/1

21. Institute Joanna Briggs. JBI critical appraisal tools (JBI). Joanna Briggs Institute; Published online 2023. Published online 2023https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools.AccessedNovember14, 2024 .

22. Zhu X, Xia M, Hu Y, et al. Mental status and psychological needs of Chinese police officers in a highly impacted city during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Mental Health Promotion. 2020;22(3):149–157. doi:10.32604/IJMHP.2020.011097

23. Boovaragasamy C, Kumar M, Sandirakumaran A, Gnanasabai G, Rahman M, Govindasamy A. COVID-19 and police personnel: an exploratory community based study from South India. J Family Med Prim Care. 2021;10(2):816–819. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1249_20

24. Dey A, Majumdar P, Saha A, Sahu S. COVID-19 pandemic lockdown-induced altered sleep/wake circadian rhythm, health complaints and stress among traffic police personnel in India. Chronobiol Int. 2021;38(1):140–148. doi:10.1080/07420528.2020.1831524

25. Frenkel MO, Giessing L, Egger-Lampl S, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on European police officers: stress, demands, and coping resources. J Crim Justice. 2021:72.doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101756.

26. Huang Q, Bodla AA, Chen C. An exploratory study of police officers’ perceptions of health risk, work stress, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Front Psychol. 2021;12. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.632970

27. Jiang Q. Stress response of police officers during COVID-19: a moderated mediation model. J Investig Psychol Offender Profilin. 2021;18(2):116–128. doi:10.1002/jip.1569

28. Langvik E, Karlsen HR, Saksvik-Lehouillier I, Sørengaard TA. Police employees working from home during COVID-19 lockdown: those with higher score on extraversion miss their colleagues more and are more likely to socialize with colleagues outside work. Pers Individ Dif. 2021;179. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2021.110924

29. Pink J, Gray NS, O’Connor C, Knowles JR, Simkiss NJ, Snowden RJ. Psychological distress and resilience in first responders and health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Occup Organ Psychol. 2021;94(4):789–807. doi:10.1111/joop.12364

30. Rajbhandari B, Tiwari B, Gurung M, et al. COVID stress among Nepal police officers. J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2021;19(2):390–395. doi:10.33314/jnhrc.v19i2.3672

31. Rojas-Solis JL, Hernandez-Corona ME, Garcia-Ramirez BEB, Lopez-Cortes VA. Burnout, psychological discomfort and life satisfaction in police officers during the health contingency due to COVID-19: an exploratory study. Arch Med. 2021;21(2):556–566. doi:10.30554/archmed.21.2.4118.2021

32. Sener H, Arikan I, Gündüz N, Gülekci Y. Detecting the relationship between the stress levels and perceived burnout in law-enforcement officers during the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-sectional study. Soc Work Public Health. 2021;36(4):486–495. doi:10.1080/19371918.2021.1915910

33. Si G, Xu Y, Li M, Zhang Y, Peng S, Tan X. Sleep quality and associated factors during the COVID-19 epidemic among community non-medical anti-epidemic Workers of Wuhan, China. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1). doi:10.1186/s12889-021-11312-8

34. Talavera-Velasco B, Luceno-Moreno L, Garcia-Albuerne Y, Martin-Garcia J. Perception of health, resilience, and engagement in Spanish police officers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psicothema. 2021;33(4):556–563. doi:10.7334/psicothema2021.153

35. Brouzos A, Vassilopoulos SP, Romosiou V, et al. ‘Stay safe-feel positive’ on the frontline: an online positive psychology intervention for police officers during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Posit Psychol. 2022;17(6):898–908. doi:10.1080/17439760.2021.1975161

36. Danker TN, Yap HL, Zalzuli AD, Ho HF, Ang J. Surviving work from home: observations from Singapore. J Police Crim Psychol. 2022;37(2):407–422. doi:10.1007/s11896-021-09461-y

37. Grover S, Sahoo S, Dua D, Mehra A, Nehra R. Psychological impact of COVID-19 duties during lockdown on police personnel and their perception about the behavior of the people: an exploratory study from India. Int J Ment Health Addict. 2022;20(2):831–842. doi:10.1007/s11469-020-00408-8

38. Hung WL, Liu HT. Causal model analysis of police officers’ COVID-19 fear, resistance to organizational change effect on emotional exhaustion and insomnia. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(16):10374. doi:10.3390/ijerph191610374

39. Kukić F, Orr RM, Vesković A, Petrović N, Subošić D, Koropanovski N. Association between perceived stress, coping profile and fear during the COVID-19 pandemic among male and female police students. Med Pr. 2022;73(3):179–190. doi:10.13075/mp.5893.01145

40. Li JCM, Cheung CK, Sun IY, Cheung YK, Zhu S. Work–family conflicts, stress, and turnover intention among Hong Kong police officers amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Police Q. 2022;25(3):281–309. doi:10.1177/10986111211034777

41. McAlearney AS, Gaughan AA, Macewan SR, et al. Pandemic experience of first responders: fear, frustration, and stress. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(8):4693. doi:10.3390/ijerph19084693

42. Huang FFY, Liu HT. Path model analysis of the effects of perceived formalism, and fear of COVID-19 on police officers’ PTSD and insomnia. Behav Sci. 2023;13(10):867. doi:10.3390/bs13100867

43. Ndubueze PN. Police personnel stress during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Kano, Nigeria. Int J Police Sci Manag. 2023;26(2):170–181. doi:10.1177/14613557231209834

44. Ravikumar T. Occupational stress and psychological wellbeing during COVID 19: mediating role of positive psychological capital. Curr Psychol. 2023;42(23):20157–20164. doi:10.1007/s12144-022-02861-1

45. Wu J, Wu Q, Xia M, Xiao J, Yan X, Li D. A study on mental health and its influencing factors among police officers during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Front Psychiatry. 2023;14. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1192577

46. Sharma R, Kumar K, Aditya AS, et al. To study the distress, anxiety, depression, and sleep effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on essential workers. Indian J Community Med. 2024;49(2):424–428. doi:10.4103/ijcm.ijcm_140_23

47. Li Y, Wen Z, He Y, Huang J. Mental health status among prison officers in the process of enforcing the law during COVID-19 epidemic: a cross-sectional survey from China. BMC Psychiatry. 2022;22(1). doi:10.1186/s12888-021-03679-0

48. Der Molen HFV, Nieuwenhuijsen K, Frings-Dresen MHW, De Groene G. Work-related psychosocial risk factors for stress-related mental disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2020;10(7). doi:10.1136/BMJOPEN-2019-034849

49. Al Houri HN, Alhouri A, Arrouk DMN, et al. Stress, depression, anxiety, and quality of life among the healthcare workers during COVID-19 pandemic in Syria: a multi-center study. Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2023;22(1). doi:10.1186/S12991-023-00470-1

50. Fazio M, Pluchino A, Inturri G, Le Pira M, Giuffrida N, Ignaccolo M. Exploring the impact of mobility restrictions on the COVID-19 spreading through an agent-based approach. J Transp Health. 2022;25:101373. doi:10.1016/J.JTH.2022.101373

51. Krishna Reddy CH, Achari PK, Nisha B, Radha AR. Significance of laboratory markers in predicting the severity of COVID-19 in the central reserve police force front-line workers with a review of literature. Indian J Public Health. 2022;66(4):512–515. doi:10.4103/ijph.ijph_1470_21

52. Harris MW, Byrne KA, Pury CLS, et al. More relaxed but less helpful: the relationship between stress, age, and self-reported prosocial behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psych. 2022;4(4):833–842. doi:10.3390/PSYCH4040061

53. Bowler RM, Han H, Gocheva V, et al. Gender differences in probable posttraumatic stress disorder among police responders to the 2001 World Trade Center terrorist attack. Am J Ind Med. 2010;53(12):1186–1196. doi:10.1002/AJIM.20876

54. Hansson J, Padyab M. How the availability and adequacy of social support affect the general mental health of Swedish police officers. Front Psychol. 2023;14. doi:10.3389/FPSYG.2023.1196320