Effects of Creatine Monohydrate on Endurance Performance in a Trained Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Fernández-Landa J, Santibañez-Gutierrez A, Todorovic N, Stajer V, Ostojic SM
Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 18 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2023-03-06 · Sports Med · vol. 53 · issue 5 · pp. 1017–1027
- Publisher
- Springer Science+Business Media
- Cited
- 26 citations · more than 73% of similar papers · 1.0× the field average
- References
- 60 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Muscle metabolism and nutrition · Thermoregulation and physiological responses · Exercise and Physiological Responses
- Keywords
- Meta-analysis, Medicine, Creatine, Confidence interval, Population, Physical therapy, Systematic review, Strictly standardized mean difference, Funnel plot, Placebo, Sports medicine, Internal medicine, Aerobic exercise, MEDLINE, Publication bias, Alternative medicine, Pathology, Biology, Environmental health
- MeSH
- humans, creatine, exercise, nutritional status, dietary supplements, athletes
5 authors
From ES, RS, NO
- Julen Fernández-Landa · correspondingUniversity of the Basque Country; University of Novi Sad
- Asier Santibañez-GutierrezUniversity of the Basque Country; University of Novi Sad
- Nikola TodorovićUniversity of Novi Sad
- Valdemar ŠtajerUniversity of Novi Sad
- Sergej M. OstojićUniversity of Novi Sad; University of Agder
Abstract
Background
There is robust evidence that creatine monohydrate supplementation can enhance short-term high-intensity exercise in athletes. However, the effect of creatine monohydrate supplementation on aerobic performance and its role during aerobic activities is still controversial.
Objective
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the supplementation effects of creatine monohydrate on endurance performance in a trained population.
Methods
The search strategy in this systematic review and meta-analysis was designed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were explored from inception until 19 May, 2022. Only human experimental trials, controlled with a placebo group, evaluating the effects of creatine monohydrate supplementation on endurance performance in a trained population were analyzed in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.
Results
A total of 13 studies satisfied all the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The results for the pooled meta-analysis showed a non-significant change in endurance performance after creatine monohydrate supplementation in a trained population (p = 0.47), with a trivial negative effect (pooled standardized mean difference = - 0.07 [95% confidence interval - 0.32 to 0.18]; I2 = 34.75%). Further, after excluding the studies not evenly distributed around the base of the funnel plot, the results were similar (pooled standardized mean difference = - 0.07 [95% confidence interval - 0.27 to 0.13]; I2 = 0%; p = 0.49).
Conclusions
Creatine monohydrate supplementation was shown to be ineffective on endurance performance in a trained population.
Clinical trial registration
The study protocol was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Review (PROSPERO) with the following registration number: CRD42022327368.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.