Factors influencing stress during the second imposed of COVID-19 social restrictions in Indonesia

Abstract

Background: The spread of the COVID-19 virus has had a significant impact on the governmental and social aspects, as well as to the psychological status of the population. In Indonesia, social restriction was a strategy to limit people’s mobility to reduce virus transmission. As social beings, the imposition of social restriction makes them fall into stress due to feeling lonely, and some cannot earn money. The aim of the study was to assess the factor association of stress level and resilience of the Indonesian people during the imposition of the second social restriction due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Design and method: A cross-sectional study was performed on respondents aged at least 18 years on 29 July–16 August 2021, when the social restriction was enforced for the second time. The online survey was conducted through several social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and WhatsApp) to 256 respondents. The analysis was carried out descriptively and analytically using the chi-square and binary logistic regression. Results: This study shows that there is a significant relationship between age ( p < 0.001), marital status ( p < 0.001), occupation ( p < 0.001), income before and during the pandemic ( p < 0.001) and resilience level to stress level among Indonesian. Resilience level is the only protective factor for people to not get stressed. Being normal resilience put them at 0.05 times (95% CI 0.01–0.76) more likely to have low perceived stress than low resilience. Conclusion: Resilience level is the only factor that influence stress level among people in Indonesia during the second imposed social restriction in Indonesia.

Anxiety and Stress During the COVID-19 Lockdown Among the General Population in Perambalur: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…In the present study, perceived stress was significantly associated only with gender and age. But according to a study conducted by Sulistyawati et al, stress had a significant relationship with age, marital status, occupation, and income [ 18 ].…”