| Literature DB >> 35954576 |
Royce Anders1,2, Lauriane Willemin-Petignat3, Cornelia Rolli Salathé3,4, Andrea C Samson3,5, Benjamin Putois3,6.
Abstract
Police officers are frequently exposed to highly stressful situations at work and have an increased risk to develop symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and burnout (BO). It is currently not well understood which officers are most at risk to develop these disorders. The aim of this study was to determine which coping strategies and personality traits could act as protective or risk factors in relation to PTSD and BO. The second aim, in the interest of designating preventive and therapeutical measures, was to determine whether certain profiles of police officers could be identified as high risk for developing mental disorders. Herein, 1073 French-speaking police officers in Switzerland reported in an online survey about their PTSD and BO symptoms, anxiety, depression, suicide ideation, coping strategies, occupational stress, and personality factors. The cluster analysis highlighted three principal profiles of police officers: those who are not at risk of developing pathologies because they are not exposed or insensitive to these stressors, and those who are, among which personality and coping strategies oriented the risk of developing PTSD or BO. These same protective and risk factors were also corroborated in the linear and logistic regression analyses. These results may suggest that a crucial opportunity for mitigating mental health issues in the force could consist of screening recruits for risk-related personality traits and orienting them towards psychological training programs for the development of functional coping strategies.Entities:
Keywords: PTSD; burnout; coping strategies; personality; police; stress; trauma
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35954576 PMCID: PMC9368562 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19159218
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Descriptive Statistics, Positivity Thresholds and Counts for IES-R PTSD, MBI Burnout, MBI Emotional Exhaustion, HADS Anxiety, HADS Depression Scales and Suicidal Ideation.
| IES-R PTSD | MBI Burnout | MBI Emotional Exhaustion | HADS Anxiety | HADS Depression | BDI-II | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | 12.0 (13.4) | Multi-scale | 12.9 (9.0) | 5.6 (3.3) | 3.2 (3.0) | 0.14 (0.37) |
| IQR | 2–17 | - | 17–50 | 3–7 | 1–5 | 0–0 |
| Max | 76 | - | 50 | 21 | 18 | 3 |
| Threshold≥ | 24|33 | Multi-scale | 18 | 8 | 8 | 1 |
| % Positive | 16|9 | 16 | 25 | 25 | 9 | 14 |
Note: IES-R = Impact of Event Scale–Revised, MBI = Maslach Burnout Inventory, HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, BDI-II = Beck Depression Inventory; see Section 2 for a detailed explanation.
Figure 1Distributions of pathological scores and cutoffs (vertical lines) for each of the scales (left to right) IES-R PTSD (clinical concern ≥ 24 in orange; 16% and positivity ≥ 33 in red; 9%), MBI Emotional Exhaustion (≥18), HADS Anxiety (≥8), HADS Depression (≥8) Scales. The red shaded area denotes where the upper 50% of police officers are situated (the median and above). The area to the right of the vertical lines designates pathology presence (e.g., ≥threshold).
Two-sample t-tests (presence vs. absence) for pathologies PTSD, Burnout, Suicidal Ideation, Anxiety and Depression (test statistic values and * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001 after Holm-Bonferroni correction). Above the first horizontal line, the pathological group had weaker values for these variables.
| IES-R PTSD | MBI | HADS Anxiety | HADS Depression | BDI-II | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Positive | 9% | 16% | 25% | 9% | 14% |
| BCope Reinterpretation Positive | −3.04 * | −7.34 *** | −7.44 *** | −6.57 *** | −4.63 *** |
| B5 Agreableness | −2.57 | −7.76 *** | −4.52 *** | −4.37 *** | −4.17 *** |
| BCope Humour | −3.68 ** | −3.08 * | −6.18 *** | −4.88 *** | −1.25 |
| B5 Conscientiousness | −1.10 | −4.88 *** | −3.05 * | −3.26 * | −1.49 |
| B5 Extraversion | −0.85 | −3.86 ** | −2.43 | −4.38 *** | −1.72 |
| BCope Acceptance | −0.56 | −4.82 *** | −3.57 ** | −2.28 | −1.57 |
| BCope Active Coping | 0.88 | −4.21 *** | −0.70 | −3.36 * | 0.08 |
| BCope Emotional Expression | 1.09 | −2.30 | 0.29 | −3.00 * | −0.46 |
| B5 Neuroticism | 6.74 *** | 11.11 *** | 19.66 *** | 8.30 *** | 7.34 *** |
| PSQ Stress Organisational | 4.98 *** | 13.62 *** | 10.09 *** | 8.58 *** | 5.14 *** |
| PSQ Life Imbalance | 6.22 *** | 8.72 *** | 6.63 *** | 8.67 *** | 4.08 ** |
| BCope Behavior Withdrawal | 6.66 *** | 7.08 *** | 7.96 *** | 7.07 *** | 5.03 *** |
| BCope Blame | 5.51 *** | 5.23 *** | 8.55 *** | 6.50 *** | 6.56 *** |
| BCope Substance Use | 4.08 ** | 5.60 *** | 6.14 *** | 4.12 ** | 4.40 *** |
| BCope Denial | 6.09 *** | 3.93 ** | 5.70 *** | 3.88 ** | 4.44 *** |
| PSQ Stress Operational | 5.36 *** | 5.94 *** | 4.60 *** | 4.16* * | 2.24 |
| BCope Distraction | 7.91 *** | 1.93 | 4.25 *** | 0.07 | 1.89 |
| BCope Religion | 3.78 ** | 1.28 | 3.82 ** | 1.39 | 4.17 *** |
| Years of Service | 1.59 | 0.79 | 2.57 | 2.50 | 6.24 *** |
| Age | 1.82 | 0.48 | 1.98 | 1.39 | 5.36 *** |
| BCope Emotional Support | 4.23 *** | −0.74 | 3.18 * | −1.02 | 0.76 |
| Gender | 0.11 | 0.33 | −3.15 * | 1.07 | 5.05 *** |
Note: BCope = The Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory, B5 = Big Five Inventory in French, IES-R = Impact of Event Scale–Revised, MBI = Maslach Burnout Inventory, HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, BDI-II = Beck Depression Inventory, PSQ = Police Stress Questionnaire; see Section 2 for a detailed explanation.
Linear multiple regression results for the prediction of total IES-R PTSD scores.
| Variable |
| CI |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B5 Openness | −0.12 | [−0.17, −0.07] | −4.9 | <0.001 |
| BCope Humour | −0.09 | [−0.14, −0.04] | −3.36 | 0.001 |
| BCope Active Coping | −0.08 | [−0.15, −0.01] | −2.33 | 0.02 |
| PSQ Stress Operational | 0.17 | [0.12, 0.22] | 6.38 | <0.001 |
| BCope Substance Use | 0.14 | [0.09, 0.19] | 5.74 | <0.001 |
| BCope Behavior Withdrawal | 0.14 | [0.09, 0.19] | 5.32 | <0.001 |
| BCope Distraction | 0.14 | [0.09, 0.19] | 5.23 | <0.001 |
| BCope Religion | 0.11 | [0.06, 0.16] | 4.47 | <0.001 |
| BCope Emotional Support | 0.17 | [0.10, 0.25] | 4.44 | <0.001 |
| B5 Neuroticism | 0.12 | [0.07, 0.18] | 4.38 | <0.001 |
| BCope Denial | 0.10 | [0.05, 0.15] | 3.9 | <0.001 |
| BCope Emotional Expression | 0.12 | [0.05, 0.18] | 3.52 | <0.001 |
| BCope Acceptance | 0.08 | [0.02, 0.13] | 2.85 | 0.004 |
Note: BCope = The Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory, B5 = Big Five Inventory in French, IES-R = Impact of PSQ = Police Stress Questionnaire; see Section 2 for a detailed explanation.
Logistic regression results for the prediction of BO pathology presence (as determined by the MBI subscales).
| Variable |
| CI |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BCope Active Coping | −0.88 | [−1.31, −0.45] | −4.03 | <0.001 |
| B5 Agreableness | −0.51 | [−0.79, −0.24] | −3.72 | <0.001 |
| B5 Conscientiousness | −0.48 | [−0.76, −0.2] | −3.4 | 0.001 |
| Bcope Reinterpretation Positive | −0.6 | [−1.0, −0.2] | −2.96 | 0.003 |
| Bcope Acceptance | −0.38 | [−0.69, −0.08] | −2.44 | 0.02 |
| PSQ Stress Organizational | 2.15 | [1.74, 2.55] | 10.3 | <0.001 |
| B5 Neuroticism | 1.55 | [1.2, 1.91] | 8.57 | <0.001 |
| PSQ Life Imbalance | 0.82 | [0.5, 1.13] | 5.08 | <0.001 |
| Bcope Behavior Withdrawal | 0.46 | [0.23, 0.68] | 3.9 | <0.001 |
| Bcope Distraction | 0.42 | [0.07, 0.77] | 2.36 | 0.02 |
| Bcope Substance Use | 0.23 | [0.0, 0.46] | 2 | 0.04 |
Note: Bcope = The Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory, B5 = Big Five Inventory in French, MBI = Maslach Burnout Inventory, PSQ = Police Stress Questionnaire; see Section 2 for a detailed explanation.
Figure 2Clusters of the police officers obtained from an optimized spectral clustering algorithm. Each point represents an individual officer’s values on the first (x-axis), second (y-axis) and third (z-axis) principal components of the data (Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 3). The cluster centroids are calculated as the mean value of the cluster for each of the three dimensions. This diagnostic demonstrates the satisfactory result of within-cluster cohesion and between-cluster separation with respect to the three strongest principal components, as per the total variance they explained (17.9%, 14.1% and 6.0%, respectively).
Figure 3Hierarchical clustering analysis: Mean values of each variable (after Yeo-Johnson transformation and standardization) for each cluster. Variables are sorted based on the most significant positive differences between cluster 1 and 2, most significant negative differences, then non-significant differences. All pairwise significance tests between the clusters are provided in Table S2 in the Supplementary Materials. Note: Bcope = The Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory, B5 = Big Five Inventory in French, IES-R = Impact of Event Scale–Revised, MBI = Maslach Burnout Inventory, HADS = Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, BDI-II = Beck Depression Inventory, PSQ = Police Stress Questionnaire; see Section 2 for a detailed explanation.