Risk and protective factors for the development of stress in the Federal Highway Police

Oliveira, Léa Pintor de Arruda; Oliveira, Lucio Garcia de; Carvalho, Heráclito Barbosa de

doi:10.1590/1982-0275202340e210194

Léa Pintor de Arruda Oliveira Correspondence to: L. P. A. OLIVEIRA. E-mail: leap@terra.com.br.

conception and design

analysis and interpretation of data

discussion of results

revision and approval of the final version of the article

Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4762-5078

Lucio Garcia de Oliveira

conception and design

revision and approval of the final version of the article

Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9805-8347

Heráclito Barbosa de Carvalho

conception and design

revision and approval of the final version of the article

Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina. São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7037-5655

Correspondence to: L. P. A. OLIVEIRA. E-mail: leap@terra.com.br.

Editor

André Luiz Monezi de Andrade

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Models	Characterization	Variables
V1	Sociodemographic	Sex Leisure Age (or career length)^* * Either one or the other was used because when tested jointly in the model, there was multicollinearity in the Variance Inflation Factor coefficient. Having been criminally prosecuted Children Educational level
V2	Suicidal ideations	Suicidal ideations (last 12 months)
V3	Self-perception of life-threatening danger	Daily risk of life Risk of life caused by the profession
V4	Self-perception regarding job satisfaction	Degree of job satisfaction Low remuneration
V5	Self-perception of the physical and emotional conditions of being a Federal Highway Police	Daily stress Physical fatigue after working day Mental fatigue after working day Frequent insomnia
V6	Self-perception of the job conditions offered by the corporation	Scarce material and equipment resources x quality of work Reduced team Lack of support from the institution Lack of training as a police officer Lack of staff training Working day Working hours Good working environment improves relationship at work
V7	Self-perception of the conflict between work and family life	Aggressive after joining the Federal Highway Police Work routine x family
V8	Self-perception in dealing with situations that can result in critical incidents (acute stress)	Dealing with ill-natured people as Law offenders Stress with serious accidents Stress with fatalities and/or serious injuries Stress caused by reporting accidents and deaths to family members Death resulting from the performance of their legal duties

Variables		Stress				p-value	PR	95% CI
		No		Yes
		n	%	n	%
Sex
	Female	6	42.9	8	57.1	0.28	1
	Male	109	58.0	79	42.0		0.7	[0.5–1.2]
Marital status
	With spouse	95	57.2	71	42.8	0.90	1
	Without spouse	20	55.6	16	44.4		1.0	[0.7–1.6]
Children
	No	24	51.1	23	48.9	0.40	1
	Yes	89	58.9	62	41.1		0.8	[0.6–1.2]
Educational level
	Sp/Mt/Dt	14	70.0	6	30.0	0.3	1
	ES-MS/HS	14	48.3	15	51.7		1.7	[0.8–3.7]
	College degree	87	56.9	66	43.1		1.4	[0.7–2.9]
Leisure
	No	9	33.3	18	66.7	0.01	1
	Yes	106	60.6	69	39.4		0.6	[0.4–0.8]

Variables	Stress										p-value
	No					Yes
	M	SD	Q50	Q25	Q75	M	SD	Q50	Q25	Q75
Age range	42.8	6.6	43.0	38.0	47.5	42.1	7.4	42.0	36.0	48.0	0.05^**
Career time	13.2	6.8	15.0	8.0	20.0	13.6	7.7	15.0	9.0	20.0	0.50^*
Degree of Satisfaction	7.6	1.8	8.0	7.0	09.0	6.5	2.0	07.0	5.5	08.0	< 0.001^*

Variables		Stress				p-value	PR	95% CI
		No		Yes
		n	%	n	%
Place of residence x work
	No	55	56.1	43	43.9	0.9	1
	Yes	60	57.7	44	42.3		0.9	[0.7–1.3]
Role
	Administrative	28	54.9	23	45.1.	0.7	1
	Special group	12	50.0	12	50.0		1.1	[0.7–1.8]
	Operational	74	58.7	52	41.3		0.9	[0.6–1.3]
Working hours
	Daily (8–12 hours)	29	58	21	42	0.6	1
	Shifts	81	57.9	59	42.1		1.0	[0.7–1.5]
	Other	5	41.7	7	58.3		1.4	[0.8–2.5]
Working period
	Day and nighttime	86	58.1	62	41.9	0.6	1
	Daytime only	29	53.7	25	46.3		1.1	[0.8–1.6]
Exclusive dedication
	No	107	56.6	82	43.4	0.6	1
	Yes	8	66.7	4	33.3		0.8	[0.3–1.7]
Feeling grief at work
	Has never had	12	52.2	11	47.8	0.7	1
	Has had	103	57.5	76	42.5		0.9	[0.6–1.4]
Death resulting from the performance of their legal duties
	No	91	56.5	70	43.5	0.9	1
	Yes	24	58.5	17	41.5		0.9	[0.6–1.4]
Risk of life at work
	No	14	63.6	8	36.4	0.6	1
	Yes	101	56.1	79	43.9		1.2	[0.7–2.1]
Having been criminally prosecuted
	Has never been	97	58.4	69	41.6	0.4	1
	Has been	18	50	18	50		1.2	[0.8–1.7]
Suicidal ideations (last year)^* * This item is part of the general questionnaire: characterization of the level of stress: perception within the work environment, however, for reasons of organization/presentation of the data, it was placed next to this table. CI: Confidence Interval; PR: Prevalence Ratio.
	Has never had	110	59.8	74.0	40.2	0.002	1
	Has had	5	29.4	12.0	70.6		1.8	[1.2–2.5]

Variables	Stress										p-value^* * p-value in bold equals significant result. The verification of the normal distribution of variables was performed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. For parametric variables, p-value was obtained by t-Student; for non-parametric variables (not from normal distribution), the Mann-Whitney test was used. Q50: Median; Q25: Quartile 25%; Q75: Quartile 75%.
	No					Yes
	M	SD	Q50	Q25	Q75	M	SD	Q50	Q25	Q75
Daily risk of life	7.3	2.5	8.0	5.0	10.0	8.3	2.2	9.0	7.5	10.0	0.002
Daily stress	4.6	2.8	5.0	2.5	06.5	7.0	2.2	7.0	5.0	09.0	< 0.001
Stress routine	5.0	2.8	5.0	3.0	07.0	7.1	2.4	8.0	5.0	09.0	< 0.001
Physical fatigue after working day	7.0	2.8	8.0	5.0	09.0	8.5	1.9	9.0	8.0	10.0	< 0.001
Mental fatigue after work period.	6.7	2.7	7.0	5.0	09.0	8.2	1.9	9.0	7.0	10.0	< 0.001
Frequent insomnia	3.2	3.3	2.0	0.0	05.0	5.8	3.6	6.0	2.0	09.5	< 0.001
Aggressive after joining the PRF	3.5	3.2	3.0	0.5	06.0	5.8	3.5	7.0	3.0	08.0	< 0.001
Work routine x family	3.2	3.2	2.0	0.0	05.0	6.4	3.0	7.0	5.0	08.5	< 0.001
Scarce material resources and equipment x quality of work	6.2	3.0	7.0	4.0	09.0	7.1	2.9	8.0	5.0	09.5	0.028
Reduced team	8.9	2.0	10.0	8.0	10.0	9.4	1.4	10.0	9.5	10.0	0.028
Good working environment improves relationship at work	6.6	2.6	7.0	5.0	09.0	6.1	2.6	6.0	4.5	08.0	0.135
Police work is life-threatening	6.8	3.0	7.0	5.0	10.0	8.1	2.7	9.0	7.5	10.0	< 0.001
Lack of support from the institution	6.1	2.8	6.0	4.0	08.0	7.4	2.3	8.0	6.0	09.0	0.001
Lack of training as a police officer	6.0	2.9	6.0	5.0	08.0	7.3	2.5	8.0	6.0	09.0	0.001
Lack of staff training	6.5	2.6	7.0	5.0	08.0	7.2	2.6	8.0	6.0	09.0	0.025
Dealing with ill-natured people as lawbreakers	4.9	3.1	5.0	2.0	07.5	7.2	2.8	8.0	5.0	10.0	< 0.001
Stress with serious accidents	3.9	2.9	4.0	1.0	06.0	6.2	3.1	7.0	5.0	09.0	< 0.001
Stress with fatalities and/or serious injuries	3.9	3.0	3.0	1.5	06.0	6.2	3.2	7.0	5.0	09.0	< 0.001
Stress in reporting accidents anddeaths to family members	4.4	2.9	5.0	2.0	07.0	6.4	3.0	7.0	4.5	09.0	< 0.001
Low remuneration	7.0	2.8	7.0	5.0	09.5	7.8	2.3	8.0	6.5	10.0	0.032

Variables	Sociodemographic (V1)		Model 2 (V1+ V2)		Model 3 (V1+ V3)		Model 4 (V1+ V4)		Model 5 (V1+ V5)		Model 6 (V1+ V6)		Model 7 (V1+ V7)		Model 8 (V1+ V8)
Variables	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value	Coef.	p- value
V1 - Sociodemographic
Sex (Male)	-0.44	0.464	-0.537	0.372	-0.518	0.401	-0.463	0.458	-0.282	0.675	-0.468	0.461	-0.538	0.417	-0.35	0.592
Leisure (yes)	-1.255	0.006	-1.142	0.013	-1.222	0.009	-1.114	0.02	-1.006	0.041	-1.211	0.012	-0.636	0.207	-1.451	0.004
Age range	-0.006	0.807	0.00	0.986	0.002	0.924	-0.005	0.862	-0.001	0.977	-0.004	0.89	0.031	0.282	0.007	0.788
Having been criminally prosecuted	0.659	0.097	0.562	0.165	0.522	0.197	0.615	0.134	0.29	0.505	0.582	0.17	0.05	0.911	0.314	0.473
Children (yes)	-0.55	0.176	-0.621	0.132	-0.733	0.083	-0.46	0.286	-0.727	0.104	-0.606	0.165	-0.837	0.07	-0.681	0.128
Educational level (E-M/H)	1.167	0.070	1.054	0.107	0.977	0.143	1.698	0.018	1.203	0.093	1.358	0.051	1.27	0.084	1.662	0.023
Educational level (college degree)	0.523	0.321	0.514	0.336	0.448	0.415	0.742	0.197	0.418	0.467	0.46	0.413	-0.538	0.417	0.786	0.172
V2 –Suicidal ideations
Suicidal ideations (last 12 months)			1.346	0.031
V3 - Self-perception of life-threatening danger
Daily risk of life					0.11	0.264
Police work is life-threatening					0.088	0.292
V4 - Self-perception regarding job satisfaction
Degree of job satisfaction							-0.31	0.001
Low remuneration							0.166	0.012
V5 - Self-perception of the physical and emotional conditions of being a Federal Highway Police
Stressful routine									0.164	0.051
Physical fatigue after working day									0.037	0.731
Mental fatigue after working day									0.037	0.757
Recurrent insomnia									0.156	0.002
V6 - Self-perception of the job conditions offered by the corporation
Material resources -scarce equipment x quality of work											-0.038	0.578
Reduced team											0.001	0.996
Lack of support from the institution											0.145	0.062
V6 - Self-perception of the job conditions offered by the corporation
Lack of training as a police officer											0.288	0.011
Lack of staff training											-0.157	0.16
V7 - Self-perception of the conflict between work and family life
Aggressive after joining the PRF													0.003	0.96
Work routine x family													0.308	<0.001
V8 -Self-perception in dealing with situations that can result in critical incidents (acute stress)
Dealing with ill-natured people as Lawoffenders															0.132	0.066
Stress with serious accidents															0.087	0.465
Stress with fatalities and/or serious injuries															0.094	0.411
Stress in reporting accidents and deaths to family members															0.035	0.688

[1] Correspondence to: L. P. A. OLIVEIRA. E-mail: leap@terra.com.br.

Brasil

Brasil

Risk and protective factors for the development of stress in the Federal Highway Police

Fatores de risco e proteção para o desenvolvimento do estresse na Polícia Rodoviária Federal

Abstract

Objective

Method

Results

Conclusion