Diagnosis and treatment of combat stress reaction: Current attitudes of military physicians

This study examined the attitudes of 203 Israel Defense Forces (IDF) military physicians regarding the causes and treatment of combat stress reaction. The findings indicate that subjects tended primarily to endorse situational rather than predispositional explanations for the causation of the CSR. They attributed the highest levels of responsibility for treatment to the frontline physician and to commanders, and the least amount of responsibility to the casualty himself. These findings suggest that military physicians do not hold CSR casualties responsible for the causation or the treatment of the stress reaction. CSR is now viewed within the medical model. It is considered by doctors to be within the purview of medicine and CSR casualties are considered legitimate objects of medical concern. The stigma attached to the phenomenon in the past thus appears to have diminished considerably.