CSC should be done as soon as possible when operations permit. Intervention is provided as soon as symptoms appear.

Modern front-line combat stress treatment techniques are designed to mimic the historically used PIE techniques with some modification. BICEPS is the current treatment route employed by the U.S. military and stresses differential treatment by the severity of CSR symptoms present in the service member. BICEPS is employed as a means to treat CSR symptoms and return soldiers quickly to combat.

The following BICEPS program is taken from the USMC combat stress handbook:

Benzodiazepines are not recommended for the treatment of PTSD due to a lack of evidence of benefit and risk of worsening PTSD symptoms. Some authors believe that the use of benzodiazepines is contraindicated for acute stress, as this group of drugs promotes dissociation and ulterior revivals. Nevertheless, some use benzodiazepines with caution for short-term anxiety and insomnia. While benzodiazepines can alleviate acute anxiety, there is no consistent evidence that they can stop the development of PTSD and may actually increase the risk of developing PTSD 2–5 times. Additionally, benzodiazepines may reduce the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic interventions, and there is some evidence that benzodiazepines may actually contribute to the development and chronification of PTSD. For those who already have PTSD, benzodiazepines may worsen and prolong the course of illness, by worsening psychotherapy outcomes, and causing or exacerbating aggression, depression (including suicidality), and substance use. Drawbacks include the risk of developing a benzodiazepine dependence, tolerance (i.e., short-term benefits wearing off with time), and withdrawal syndrome; additionally, individuals with PTSD (even those without a history of alcohol or drug misuse) are at an increased risk of abusing benzodiazepines. Due to a number of other treatments with greater efficacy for PTSD and less risks (e.g., prolonged exposure, cognitive processing therapy, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing, cognitive restructuring therapy, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, brief eclectic psychotherapy, narrative therapy, stress inoculation training, serotonergic antidepressants, adrenergic inhibitors, antipsychotics, and even anticonvulsants), benzodiazepines should be considered relatively contraindicated until all other treatment options are exhausted. For those who argue that benzodiazepines should be used sooner in the most severe cases, the adverse risk of disinhibition (associated with suicidality, aggression and crimes) and clinical risks of delaying or inhibiting definitive efficacious treatments, make other alternative treatments preferable (e.g., inpatient, residential, partial hospitalization, intensive outpatient, dialectic behavior therapy; and other fast-acting sedating medications such as trazodone, mirtazapine, amitripytline, doxepin, prazosin, propranolol, guanfacine, clonidine, quetiapine, olanzapine, valproate, gabapentin).

Glucocorticoids may be useful for short-term therapy to protect against neurodegeneration caused by the extended stress response that characterizes PTSD, but long-term use may actually promote neurodegeneration.

This disorder may resolve itself with time or may develop into a more severe disorder such as PTSD. However, results of Creamer, O'Donnell, and Pattison's (2004) study of 363 patients suggests that a diagnosis of acute stress disorder had only limited predictive validity for PTSD. Creamer et al. did find that re-experiences of the traumatic event and arousal were better predictors of PTSD. Early pharmacotherapy may prevent the development of posttraumtic symptoms.

Studies have been conducted to assess the efficacy of counselling and psychotherapy for people with ASD. Cognitive behavioral therapy which included exposure and cognitive restructuring was found to be effective in preventing PTSD in patients diagnosed with ASD with clinically significant results at 6 months follow-up. A combination of relaxation, cognitive restructuring, imaginal exposure, and in vivo exposure was superior to supportive counseling. Mindfulness based stress reduction programs also appear to be effective for stress management.

In a wilderness context where counseling, psychotherapy, and cognitive behavioral therapy is unlikely to be available, the treatment for acute stress reaction is very similar for the treatment of cardiogenic shock, vascular shock, and hypovolemic shock; that is, allowing the patient to lie down, providing reassurance, and removing the stimulus for the occurrence of the reaction. In traditional shock cases, this is generally the relieving of pain from injuries or the stopping of blood loss. In an acute stress reaction, this may be pulling a rescuer away from the emergency to calm down, or blocking the sight of an injured friend from a patient.

A number of psychotherapy approaches have been designed with the treatment of trauma in mind—EMDR, progressive counting (PC), somatic experiencing, biofeedback, Internal Family Systems Therapy, and sensorimotor psychotherapy.

There is a large body of empirical support for the use of cognitive behavioral therapy for the treatment of trauma-related symptoms, including posttraumatic stress disorder. Institute of Medicine guidelines identify cognitive behavioral therapies as the most effective treatments for PTSD. Two of these cognitive behavioral therapies, prolonged exposure and cognitive processing therapy, are being disseminated nationally by the Department of Veterans Affairs for the treatment of PTSD. Recent studies show that a combination of treatments involving dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), often used for borderline personality disorder, and exposure therapy is highly effective in treating psychological trauma. If, however, psychological trauma has caused dissociative disorders or complex PTSD, the trauma model approach (also known as phase-oriented treatment of structural dissociation) has been proven to work better than simple cognitive approach. Studies funded by pharmaceuticals have also shown that medications such as the new anti-depressants are effective when used in combination with other psychological approaches.

Trauma therapy allows processing trauma-related memories and allows growth towards more adaptive psychological functioning. It helps to develop positive coping instead of negative coping and allows the individual to integrate upsetting-distressing material (thoughts, feelings and memories) resolve internally. It also aids in growth of personal skills like resilience, ego regulation, empathy...etc.

Process' involved in trauma therapy are:

- Psychoeducation: Information dissemination and educating in vulnerabilities and adoptable coping mechanisms.

- Emotional regulation: Identifying, countering discriminating, grounding thoughts and emotions from internal construction to an external representation.

- Cognitive processing: Transforming negative perceptions and beliefs to positive ones about self, others and environment through cognitive reconsideration or re-framing.

- Trauma processing: Systematic desensitization, response activation and counter-conditioning, titrated extinction of emotional response, deconstructing disparity (emotional vs. reality state), resolution of traumatic material (state in which triggers don't produce the harmful distress and able to express relief.)

- Emotional processing: Reconstructing perceptions, beliefs and erroneous expectations like trauma-related fears are auto-activated and habituated in new life contexts, providing crisis cards with coded emotions and appropriate cognition's. (This stage is only initiated in pre-termination phase from clinical assessment & judgement of the mental health professional.)

- Experiential processing: Visualization of achieved relief state and relaxation methods.

Shell shock is a phrase coined in World War I to describe the type of posttraumatic stress disorder many soldiers were afflicted with during the war (before PTSD itself was a term).

It is reaction to the intensity of the bombardment and fighting that produced a helplessness appearing variously as panic and being scared, or flight, an inability to reason, sleep, walk or talk.

During the War, the concept of shell shock was ill-defined. Cases of 'shell shock' could be interpreted as either a physical or psychological injury, or simply as a lack of moral fibre. The term "shell shock" is still used by the Veterans Administration to describe certain parts of PTSD but mostly it has entered into popular imagination and memory, and is often identified as the signature injury of the War.

In World War II and thereafter, diagnosis of 'shell shock' was replaced by that of combat stress reaction, a similar but not identical response to the trauma of warfare and bombardment.

During the early stages of World War I, soldiers from the British Expeditionary Force began to report medical symptoms after combat, including tinnitus, amnesia, headaches, dizziness, tremors, and hypersensitivity to noise. While these symptoms resembled those that would be expected after a physical wound to the brain, many of those reporting sick showed no signs of head wounds. By December 1914 as many as 10% of British officers and 4% of enlisted men were suffering from "nervous and mental shock".

The term "shell shock" came into use to reflect an assumed link between the symptoms and the effects of explosions from artillery shells. The term was first published in 1915 in an article in "The Lancet" by Charles Myers. Some 60–80% of shell shock cases displayed acute neurasthenia, while 10% displayed what would now be termed symptoms of conversion disorder, including mutism and fugue.

The number of shell shock cases grew during 1915 and 1916 but it remained poorly understood medically and psychologically. Some doctors held the view that it was a result of hidden physical damage to the brain, with the shock waves from bursting shells creating a cerebral lesion that caused the symptoms and could potentially prove fatal. Another explanation was that shell shock resulted from poisoning by the carbon monoxide formed by explosions.

At the same time an alternative view developed describing shell shock as an emotional, rather than a physical, injury. Evidence for this point of view was provided by the fact that an increasing proportion of men suffering shell shock symptoms had not been exposed to artillery fire. Since the symptoms appeared in men who had no proximity to an exploding shell, the physical explanation was clearly unsatisfactory.

In spite of this evidence, the British Army continued to try to differentiate those whose symptoms followed explosive exposure from others. In 1915 the British Army in France was instructed that:

However, it often proved difficult to identify which cases were which, as the information on whether a casualty had been close to a shell explosion or not was rarely provided.

The Institute of Medicine reviewed the evidence for treatments for symptoms associated with Gulf War syndrome and related conditions. They concluded that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and cognitive behavioural therapy were most likely to be beneficial to patients.

Western doctors are more likely to diagnose it as a kind of stress or depression. The "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" currently lists "hwabyeong" among its culture-bound illnesses. Outside of Korea, informally "hwabyeong" may be mistaken as a reference to a psychological profile marked by a short temper, or explosive, generally bellicose behavior. To the contrary, "hwabyeong" is a traditional psychological term used to refer to a condition characterized by passive suffering, is roughly comparable to depression, and is typically associated with older women. It is important that when diagnosing Hwabyeong, the culture of the patient is well understood. Since Hwabyeong can often be misdiagnosed as depression, the symptoms and culture need to be clearly and thoroughly looked into. Once Hwabyeong has been diagnosed, past treatments need to be reviewed. The treatments for the patient can then be a combination of pharmacological, and therapy-based interventions.

The treatment methods used to combat hwabyung include psychotherapy, drug treatment, family therapy, and community approaches. To be more successful psychiatrists might need to incorporate the teachings from traditional and religious healing methods or the use of han-puri, which is the sentiment of resolving, loosening, unraveling and appeasing negative emotions with positive ones. One example of hann-puri would be a mother who has suffered from poverty, less education, a violent husband, or a harsh mother-in-law, can be solved many years later by the success of her son for which she had endured hardships and sacrifices.

The US military issued pyridostigmine bromide (PB) pills to protect against exposure to nerve gas agents such as sarin and soman. PB was used as a prophylactic against nerve agents; it is not a vaccine. Taken before exposure to nerve agents, PB was thought to increase the efficiency of nerve agent antidotes. PB had been used since 1955 for patients suffering from myasthenia gravis with doses up to 1,500 mg a day, far in excess of the 90 mg given to soldiers, and was considered safe by the FDA at either level for indefinite use and its use to pre-treat nerve agent exposure had recently been approved.

Given both the large body of epidemiological data on myasthenia gravis patients and follow-up studies done on veterans it was concluded that while it was unlikely that health effects reported today by Gulf War veterans are the result of exposure solely to PB, use of PB was causally associated with illness. However, a later review by the Institute of Medicine concluded that the evidence was not strong enough to establish a causal relationship.

A self-inflicted wound (SIW), is the act of harming oneself where there are no underlying psychological problems related to the self-injury, but where the injurer wanted to take advantage of being injured.

The term ASR was first used to describe the symptoms of soldiers during World War I and II, and it was therefore also termed combat stress reaction (CSR). Approximately 20% of U.S. troops displayed symptoms of CSR during WWII, and it was assumed to be a temporary response of healthy individuals to witnessing or experiencing traumatic events. Symptoms include depression, anxiety, withdrawal, confusion, paranoia and sympathetic hyperactivity.

The APA officially included the term ASD in the "DSM-IV" in 1994, and prior to that, symptomatic individuals within the first month of trauma were diagnosed with adjustment disorder. According to the "DSM IV", ASR refers to the symptoms experienced right after exposure to a traumatic event, up until 48 hours after it. In contrast, ASD is defined by symptoms experienced after 48 hours of the event, up until one month past the event. Symptoms experienced for longer than one month are consistent with a diagnosis of PTSD.

In terms of treating the mental aspect of paruresis, such treatment can be achieved by graduated exposure therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy. In graduated exposure therapy, the subject has a trusted person stand outside the restroom at first, and once the fear is overcome the observer is brought closer in, until step by step the phobia is vanquished. The International Paruresis Association provides a detailed discussion of this method on its website.

In addition to gradual exposure therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy is used to change a sufferer's mental approach to the condition, from one of a person who cannot urinate, to a person who can urinate or is not overly fearful when they can't publicly urinate.

Exposure therapy has been proven as an effective treatment for people who have a fear of bees. It is recommended that people place themselves in a comfortable open environment, such as a park or garden, and gradually over a prolonged period of time move closer to the bees. This process should not be rushed, it may take many months spent watching bees before people feel comfortable in their presence.

Apiphobia is one of the zoophobias prevalent in young children and may prevent them from taking part in any outdoor activities. Older people control the natural fear of bees more easily. However, some adults face hardships of controlling the fear of bees.

A recommended way of overcoming child's fear of bees is training to face fears (a common approach for treating specific phobias). Programs vary.

Cognitive therapy is a widely accepted form of treatment for most anxiety disorders. It is also thought to be particularly effective in combating disorders where the patient doesn't actually fear a situation but, rather, fears what could result from being in such a situation. The ultimate goal of cognitive therapy is to modify distorted thoughts or misconceptions associated with whatever is being feared; the theory is that modifying these thoughts will decrease anxiety and avoidance of certain situations. For example, cognitive therapy would attempt to convince a claustrophobic patient that elevators are not dangerous but are, in fact, very useful in getting you where you would like to go faster. A study conducted by S.J. Rachman shows that cognitive therapy decreased fear and negative thoughts/connotations by an average of around 30% in claustrophobic patients tested, proving it to be a reasonably effective method.

This method forces patients to face their fears by complete exposure to whatever fear they are experiencing. This is usually done in a progressive manner starting with lesser exposures and moving upward towards severe exposures. For example, a claustrophobic patient would start by going into an elevator and work up to an MRI. Several studies have proven this to be an effective method in combating various phobias, claustrophobia included. S.J. Rachman has also tested the effectiveness of this method in treating claustrophobia and found it to decrease fear and negative thoughts/connotations by an average of nearly 75% in his patients. Of the methods he tested in this particular study, this was by far the most significant reduction.

Herman believes recovery from C-PTSD occurs in three stages:

1. establishing safety,

2. remembrance and mourning for what was lost,

3. reconnecting with community and more broadly, society.

Herman believes recovery can only occur within a healing relationship and only if the survivor is empowered by that relationship. This healing relationship need not be romantic or sexual in the colloquial sense of "relationship", however, and can also include relationships with friends, co-workers, one's relatives or children, and the therapeutic relationship.

Complex trauma means complex reactions and this leads to complex treatments. Hence, treatment for C-PTSD requires a multi-modal approach. It has been suggested that treatment for C-PTSD should differ from treatment for PTSD by focusing on problems that cause more functional impairment than the PTSD symptoms. These problems include emotional dysregulation, dissociation, and interpersonal problems. Six suggested core components of complex trauma treatment include:

1. Safety

2. Self-regulation

3. Self-reflective information processing

4. Traumatic experiences integration

5. Relational engagement

6. Positive affect enhancement

Multiple treatments have been suggested for C-PTSD. Among these treatments are experiential and emotionally focused therapy, internal family systems therapy, sensorimotor psychotherapy, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy (EMDR), dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), cognitive behavioral therapy, psychodynamic therapy, family systems therapy and group therapy.

As "trauma" adopted a more widely defined scope, traumatology as a field developed a more interdisciplinary approach. This is in part due to the field's diverse professional representation including: psychologists, medical professionals, and lawyers. As a result, findings in this field are adapted for various applications, from individual psychiatric treatments to sociological large-scale trauma management. However, novel fields require novel methodologies. While the field has adopted a number of diverse methodological approaches, many pose their own limitations in practical application.

The experience and outcomes of psychological trauma can be assessed in a number of ways. Within the context of a clinical interview, the risk for imminent danger to the self or others is important to address but is not the focus of assessment. In most cases, it will not be necessary to involve contacting emergency services (e.g., medical, psychiatric, law enforcement) to ensure the individuals safety; members of the individual's social support network are much more critical.

Understanding and accepting the psychological state an individual is in is paramount. There are many mis-conceptions of what it means for a traumatized individual to be in crisis or 'psychosis'. These are times when an individual is in inordinate amounts of pain and cannot comfort themselves, if treated humanely and respectfully they will not get to a state in which they are a danger. In these situations it is best to provide a supportive, caring environment and communicate to the individual that no matter the circumstance they will be taken seriously and not just as a sick, delusional individual. It is vital for the assessor to understand that what is going on in the traumatized persons head is valid and real. If deemed appropriate, the assessing clinician may proceed by inquiring about both the traumatic event and the outcomes experienced (e.g., posttraumatic symptoms, dissociation, substance abuse, somatic symptoms, psychotic reactions). Such inquiry occurs within the context of established rapport and is completed in an empathic, sensitive, and supportive manner. The clinician may also inquire about possible relational disturbance, such as alertness to interpersonal danger, abandonment issues, and the need for self-protection via interpersonal control. Through discussion of interpersonal relationships, the clinician is better able to assess the individual's ability to enter and sustain a clinical relationship.

During assessment, individuals may exhibit activation responses in which reminders of the traumatic event trigger sudden feelings (e.g., distress, anxiety, anger), memories, or thoughts relating to the event. Because individuals may not yet be capable of managing this distress, it is necessary to determine how the event can be discussed in such a way that will not "retraumatize" the individual. It is also important to take note of such responses, as these responses may aid the clinician in determining the intensity and severity of possible posttraumatic stress as well as the ease with which responses are triggered. Further, it is important to note the presence of possible avoidance responses. Avoidance responses may involve the absence of expected activation or emotional reactivity as well as the use of avoidance mechanisms (e.g., substance use, effortful avoidance of cues associated with the event, dissociation).

In addition to monitoring activation and avoidance responses, clinicians carefully observe the individual's strengths or difficulties with affect regulation (i.e., affect tolerance and affect modulation). Such difficulties may be evidenced by mood swings, brief yet intense depressive episodes, or self-mutilation. The information gathered through observation of affect regulation will guide the clinician's decisions regarding the individual's readiness to partake in various therapeutic activities.

Though assessment of psychological trauma may be conducted in an unstructured manner, assessment may also involve the use of a structured interview. Such interviews might include the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS; Blake et al., 1995), Acute Stress Disorder Interview (ASDI; Bryant, Harvey, Dang, & Sackville, 1998), Structured Interview for Disorders of Extreme Stress (SIDES; Pelcovitz et al., 1997), Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Dissociative Disorders- Revised (SCID-D; Steinberg, 1994), and Brief Interview for Posttraumatic Disorders (BIPD; Briere, 1998).

Lastly, assessment of psychological trauma might include the use of self-administered psychological tests. Individuals' scores on such tests are compared to normative data in order to determine how the individual's level of functioning compares to others in a sample representative of the general population. Psychological testing might include the use of generic tests (e.g., MMPI-2, MCMI-III, SCL-90-R) to assess non-trauma-specific symptoms as well as difficulties related to personality. In addition, psychological testing might include the use of trauma-specific tests to assess posttraumatic outcomes. Such tests might include the Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale (PDS; Foa, 1995), Davidson Trauma Scale (DTS: Davidson et al., 1997), Detailed Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress (DAPS; Briere, 2001), Trauma Symptom Inventory (TSI: Briere, 1995), Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children (TSCC; Briere, 1996), Traumatic Life Events Questionnaire (TLEQ: Kubany et al., 2000), and Trauma-related Guilt Inventory (TRGI: Kubany et al., 1996).

Children are assessed through activities and therapeutic relationship, some of the activities are play genogram, sand worlds, coloring feelings, Self and Kinetic family drawing, symbol work, dramatic-puppet play, story telling, Briere's TSCC, etc.

Survivor guilt (or survivor's guilt; also called survivor syndrome or survivor's syndrome) is a mental condition that occurs when a person believes they have done something wrong by surviving a traumatic event when others did not. It may be found among survivors of murder, terrorism, combat, natural disasters, epidemics, among the friends and family of those who have died by suicide, and in non-mortal situation. The experience and manifestation of survivor's guilt will depend on an individual's psychological profile. When the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV" (DSM-IV) was published, survivor guilt was removed as a recognized specific diagnosis, and redefined as a significant symptom of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Most self-inflicted wounds occur during wartime, for various possible reasons.

Potential draftees may self-injure in order to avoid being drafted for health reasons. This was practiced as Abstinence (conscription) by some Jewish conscripts in the Russian Empire.

The most common reason enlisted soldiers self-wound is to render themselves unable to continue serving in combat, thus resulting in their removal from the combat line to a hospital. Thus, self-injury can be used to avoid a more serious combat injury or a combat death.

In prisons and forced labour camps people sometimes self-injure so that they will not be forced to work and could spend some time in the more comfortable conditions of the barracks.

Video game playing may be associated with vision problems. Extensive viewing of the screen can cause eye strain, as the cornea, pupil, and iris are not intended for mass viewing sessions of electronic devices. Using video games for too long may also cause headaches, dizziness, and chances of vomiting from focusing on a screen.

However, certain studies have shown that video games can be used to improve various eye conditions. An investigation into the effect of action gaming on spatial distribution of attention was conducted and revealed that gamers exhibited an enhancement with attention resources compared to non-gamers, not only in the periphery but also in central vision. Further studies in 2011, concluded that a combination of video game therapy alongside occlusion therapy, would greatly improve the recovery of visual acuity in those experiencing amblyopia.

Pharmaceutical treatments for GAD include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). These are the preferred first line of treatment. SSRIs used for this purpose include escitalopram and paroxetine.

Common side effects include nausea, sexual dysfunction, headache, diarrhea, constipation, restlessness, increased risk of suicide in young adults and adolescents, among others. Overdose of an SSRI can result in serotonin syndrome.

The utility of PTSD derived psychotherapies for assisting children with C-PTSD is uncertain. This area of diagnosis and treatment calls for caution in use of the category C-PTSD. Ford and van der Kolk have suggested that C-PTSD may not be as useful a category for diagnosis and treatment of children as a proposed category of developmental trauma disorder (DTD). For DTD to be diagnosed it requires a

'history of exposure to early life developmentally adverse interpersonal trauma such as sexual abuse, physical abuse, violence, traumatic losses of other significant disruption or betrayal of the child's relationships with primary caregivers, which has been postulated as an etiological basis for complex traumatic stress disorders. Diagnosis, treatment planning and outcome are always relational.'

Since C-PTSD or DTD in children is often caused by chronic maltreatment, neglect or abuse in a care-giving relationship the first element of the biopsychosocial system to address is that relationship. This invariably involves some sort of child protection agency. This both widens the range of support that can be given to the child but also the complexity of the situation, since the agency's statutory legal obligations may then need to be enforced.

A number of practical, therapeutic and ethical principles for assessment and intervention have been developed and explored in the field:

- Identifying and addressing threats to the child's or family's safety and stability are the first priority.

- A relational bridge must be developed to engage, retain and maximize the benefit for the child and caregiver.

- Diagnosis, treatment planning and outcome monitoring are always relational (and) strengths based.

- All phases of treatment should aim to enhance self-regulation competencies.

- Determining with whom, when and how to address traumatic memories.

- Preventing and managing relational discontinuities and psychosocial crises.

An international review of psychiatrists' management of patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) reported that the preferred first-line pharmacological treatments of GAD were selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (80%), followed by serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) (43%), and pregabalin (35%). Preferred second-line treatments were SNRIs (41%) and pregabalin (36%).