Staff employed by MPs are calling for urgently tightened security after reports of some being physically attacked and hundreds receiving threatening calls and messages.

A survey of more than 500 MPs’ staff members found that 78% had received threatening communication and nearly one in three fear for their own safety or that of colleagues.

Andy Burnham, the prime minister, is planning to announce a review of MPs’ security after the murder of Ann Widdecombe, a former Conservative minister and Reform UK spokesperson, this month. Joshua Kerry, 28, from Rotherham, South Yorkshire, has been charged with her murder.

In a survey of more than 500 staff working for MPs, 30% said they “frequently, very frequently or always” fear for their own or colleagues safety – up from 18.7% five years ago.

Seventy three MPs’ staffers said they were “very frequently or frequently” exposed to racist or prejudiced language from visitors, while 188 said they experienced this sometimes. One in four said they had felt pressure at least sometimes to comply with requests that might compromise their safety.

While many said parliamentary authorities had listened to their safety concerns, others felt they were still treated poorly compared with their MP.

The Westminster-based wellness working group (WWG), which represents MPs’ staff and carried out the survey, said there was an “urgent” need for greater protection for frontline staff who often act “as a proxy for their MP”.

The research, carried out by the psychologist Dr Ashley Weinberg of the University of Salford, found that one in two parliamentary staff are experiencing clinical levels of psychological distress, the highest level recorded since the survey started in 2021.

Describing the increase as “significant and sudden”, the WWG said: “It is clear the most significant issues driving distress at this current moment come from unsustainable workloads and that staff are routinely exposed to abuse, racist and sexist language, suicide threats, traumatic disclosures and threats of violence.”

Seventeen members of staff said none of the safety recommendations made to their MP had been implemented, while 59 (11% of 530 respondents) said only “some” had.

They called for the Commons authorities to have the power to impose tighter security when MPs or their office managers fail to comply. Many felt at risk because security personnel often attend only in the presence of their MP, leaving office staff sometimes alone at official events held in the MP’s name.

The WWG said: “Security arrangements should routinely extend to MPs’ staff as though the MP is present … The urgent need for this provision is emphasised by the role of staff members already acting as a proxy for their MP.”

One member of staff said they had been physically attacked twice in the past year, while another staffer said: “It has been made clear that the security operatives are only there to protect the MP.”

“Not being able to have security unless the MP is present is so wrong,” said another staff member. “Staff are out in the community representing the MP.

“Most people don’t know what the MP looks like and often think staff members are the MP. We should be allowed security when doing outreach sessions in the community.”

A House of Commons spokesperson said it recognised the concerns raised by staff and was working closely with the WWG to strengthen the support available to them.

They added: “The ability of members’ [MPs] staff to carry out their roles safely, both on and off the parliamentary estate, is fundamental to our democracy. Abuse and intimidation are completely unacceptable.”