To Heal a Mind: A Comparison of Functional and Conventional Treatments in Major Depressive Disorder

Incidence of major depressive disorder is increasing year over year, with little able to be done to halt the spread of the condition. However, there are many treatment possibilities considered unconventional by the healthcare system. This thesis examines the respective benefits and risks, in comparison to one another, between conventional pharmacological treatment and functional, holistic treatment of depression. This was done via integrative review of available clinical literature, synthesizing evidence on both conventional and functional treatments for depression, as dictated by Whittemore and Knafl (2005). Exploratory search methods revealed 758 records fulfilling inclusion criteria, which were screened and narrowed down with key operators to 19 studies, constituted only of Levels 1 or 2 of evidence (as per Johns Hopkins). The breakdown was exhibited both through literature matrix and PRISMA diagram. Analysis of clinical research available showed that pharmacologic treatment, while beneficial, has many risks associated that are not adequately conveyed. Analysis also demonstrated that there are other functional interventions that are patient-rated as incredibly effective, with a few studies suggesting more so than pharmacological therapy. Potential gaps in the research warranting further study could revolve around integration of functional medicine into depression treatment protocols. This study can be used to broaden understanding of other, alternative options for adjuvant or mild-moderate depressive treatments. This thesis will be submitted to Scholars Crossing, Liberty University’s chosen form of thesis dissemination, in May of 2025.