Caffeinated chewing gum produces comparable strength and power gains to capsules with fewer side effects in resistance-trained men.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Li Ding, Jue Liu, Yixuan Ma, Litian Bai, Li Guo, Bin Chen, Yinhang Cao, Olivier Girard
{"title":"Caffeinated chewing gum produces comparable strength and power gains to capsules with fewer side effects in resistance-trained men.","authors":"Li Ding, Jue Liu, Yixuan Ma, Litian Bai, Li Guo, Bin Chen, Yinhang Cao, Olivier Girard","doi":"10.1080/15502783.2025.2531173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Caffeine, widely used as an ergogenic aid, has been extensively studied regarding its dosage and timing of ingestion. However, the impact of different administration methods on caffeine's performance-enhancing effects remains relatively underexplored. This study compared the effects of caffeine administered via chewing gum versus capsules on maximal strength, muscular power, and side effects during bench press and back squat exercises.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixteen resistance-trained males participated in a double-blind, randomized trial, ingesting either a 4 mg/kg caffeine capsule (CC) or placebo capsule (PC) one hour before testing, or a 4 mg/kg caffeinated gum (CG) (4 mg/kg) or placebo gum (PG) five minutes prior. Assessments including one-repetition maximum (1RM) and muscular power at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 90%1RM for bench press and back squat.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Caffeine increased 1RM (+2.1-5.0%) and muscular power (+6.1-20.0%) in both the bench press and back squat compared to placebo (all <i>p</i> < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between CC and CG for maximal strength or muscular power (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). Furthermore, CG was associated with fewer reports of gastrointestinal discomfort (12.5% vs. 37.5%) immediately post-exercise and tachycardia/heart palpitations (0% vs. 25.0%) at 24 hours compared to CC (all <i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Caffeinated gum (4 mg/kg) produced ergogenic effects comparable to capsules in enhancing maximal strength and muscular power during bench press and back squat exercises, with fewer side effects in resistance-trained men.</p>","PeriodicalId":17400,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition","volume":"22 1","pages":"2531173"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12243013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15502783.2025.2531173","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Caffeine, widely used as an ergogenic aid, has been extensively studied regarding its dosage and timing of ingestion. However, the impact of different administration methods on caffeine's performance-enhancing effects remains relatively underexplored. This study compared the effects of caffeine administered via chewing gum versus capsules on maximal strength, muscular power, and side effects during bench press and back squat exercises.

Methods: Sixteen resistance-trained males participated in a double-blind, randomized trial, ingesting either a 4 mg/kg caffeine capsule (CC) or placebo capsule (PC) one hour before testing, or a 4 mg/kg caffeinated gum (CG) (4 mg/kg) or placebo gum (PG) five minutes prior. Assessments including one-repetition maximum (1RM) and muscular power at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 90%1RM for bench press and back squat.

Results: Caffeine increased 1RM (+2.1-5.0%) and muscular power (+6.1-20.0%) in both the bench press and back squat compared to placebo (all p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between CC and CG for maximal strength or muscular power (all p > 0.05). Furthermore, CG was associated with fewer reports of gastrointestinal discomfort (12.5% vs. 37.5%) immediately post-exercise and tachycardia/heart palpitations (0% vs. 25.0%) at 24 hours compared to CC (all p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Caffeinated gum (4 mg/kg) produced ergogenic effects comparable to capsules in enhancing maximal strength and muscular power during bench press and back squat exercises, with fewer side effects in resistance-trained men.

在耐力训练的男性中,含咖啡因的口香糖产生的力量和力量与胶囊相当,副作用更少。
背景:咖啡因,作为一种广泛使用的促人体健康的助剂,其剂量和摄入时间已被广泛研究。然而,不同给药方法对咖啡因提高成绩效果的影响仍未得到充分研究。这项研究比较了在卧推和后蹲练习中,通过口香糖和胶囊给药咖啡因对最大力量、肌肉力量和副作用的影响。方法:16名接受阻力训练的男性参加了一项双盲随机试验,他们在测试前一小时摄入4mg /kg咖啡因胶囊(CC)或安慰剂胶囊(PC),或在测试前五分钟摄入4mg /kg咖啡因口香糖(CG) (4mg /kg)或安慰剂口香糖(PG)。评估包括一次最大重复(1RM)和肌肉力量在25%,50%,75%和90%1RM的卧推和后蹲。结果:与安慰剂相比,咖啡因在卧推和后蹲中增加了1RM(+2.1-5.0%)和肌肉力量(+6.1-20.0%)(p < 0.05)。此外,与CC相比,CG在运动后立即出现的胃肠道不适(12.5%对37.5%)和24小时的心动过速/心悸(0%对25.0%)的报告较少(所有p结论:含咖啡因口香糖(4 mg/kg)在增强卧推和后蹲运动期间的最大力量和肌肉力量方面产生的人体作用与胶囊相当),在阻力训练的男性中副作用更少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition NUTRITION & DIETETICS-SPORT SCIENCES
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
3.90%
发文量
34
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (JISSN) focuses on the acute and chronic effects of sports nutrition and supplementation strategies on body composition, physical performance and metabolism. JISSN is aimed at researchers and sport enthusiasts focused on delivering knowledge on exercise and nutrition on health, disease, rehabilitation, training, and performance. The journal provides a platform on which readers can determine nutritional strategies that may enhance exercise and/or training adaptations leading to improved health and performance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信