Literature DB >> 31990972

A randomized, placebo-controlled crossover trial of a decaffeinated energy drink shows no significant acute effect on mental energy.

Alicia Garcia-Alvarez1, Corbin A Cunningham2, Byron Mui1, Lia Penn1, Erin M Spaulding3, J Michael Oakes4, Jasmin Divers5, Stephanie L Dickinson6, Xiao Xu6, Lawrence J Cheskin1,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: "Energy drinks" are heavily marketed to the general public, across the age spectrum. The efficacy of decaffeinated energy drinks in enhancing subjective feelings of energy (s-energy) is controversial.
OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to test the efficacy of the caffeine-free version of a popular energy drink compared with a placebo drink.
METHODS: This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in 223 healthy men and women aged 18-70 y with intention-to-treat and completers analysis. Participants were randomly assigned to consumption of either the decaffeinated energy drink or a placebo drink on testing day 1, and the other drink a week later. A battery of computer-based mood and cognitive tests to assess s-energy was conducted at baseline and at 0.5, 2.5, and 5 h post-ingestion. The main outcome measures were 1) mood, which was assessed by using a General Status Check Scale and the Profile of Mood States 2nd edition brief form, and 2) cognitive measures, including the N-back task (reaction time and accuracy), Reaction Time test, Flanker task (distraction avoidance), and Rapid Visual Information Processing test.
RESULTS: No statistically significant or meaningful benefits were observed for any outcome measure, including mood and cognitive measures. Analyses of mean differences, slopes, and median differences were consistent.
CONCLUSIONS: No differences were detected across a range of mood/cognitive/behavioral/s-energy-level tests after consumption of the energy drink compared with a placebo drink in this diverse sample of adults. Thus, we found strong evidence that the energy drink is not efficacious in enhancing s-energy levels, nor any related cognitive or behavioral variables measured. In light of federal regulations, these findings suggest that labeling and marketing of some products which claim to provide these benefits may be unsubstantiated. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02727920.
Copyright © The Author(s) 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Baltimore; United States; adults; dietary supplements; intervention; volunteers

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31990972      PMCID: PMC7049526          DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqz343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr        ISSN: 0002-9165            Impact factor:   7.045


  30 in total

1.  Age differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information.

Authors:  W K KIRCHNER
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1958-04

Review 2.  Energy beverages: content and safety.

Authors:  John P Higgins; Troy D Tuttle; Christopher L Higgins
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 7.616

3.  Randomization to randomization probability: Estimating treatment effects under actual conditions of use.

Authors:  Brandon J George; Peng Li; Harris R Lieberman; Greg Pavela; Andrew W Brown; Kevin R Fontaine; Madeline M Jeansonne; Gareth R Dutton; Adeniyi J Idigo; Mariel A Parman; Donald B Rubin; David B Allison
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2017-04-13

Review 4.  Review of published cases of adverse cardiovascular events after ingestion of energy drinks.

Authors:  Michael Goldfarb; Claudia Tellier; George Thanassoulis
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  The use of energy drinks in sport: perceived ergogenicity and side effects in male and female athletes.

Authors:  Juan J Salinero; Beatriz Lara; Javier Abian-Vicen; Cristina Gonzalez-Millán; Francisco Areces; César Gallo-Salazar; Diana Ruiz-Vicente; Juan Del Coso
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 3.718

Review 6.  Energy drinks: what is all the hype? The dangers of energy drink consumption.

Authors:  Mandy Rath
Journal:  J Am Acad Nurse Pract       Date:  2012-01-31

7.  A comparison of the effects of caffeine following abstinence and normal caffeine use.

Authors:  Merideth A Addicott; Paul J Laurienti
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2009-09-24       Impact factor: 4.530

Review 8.  Cognitive methods for assessing mental energy.

Authors:  Harris R Lieberman
Journal:  Nutr Neurosci       Date:  2007 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 4.994

9.  PsychoPy--Psychophysics software in Python.

Authors:  Jonathan W Peirce
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2007-01-23       Impact factor: 2.390

10.  A survey of energy drink consumption patterns among college students.

Authors:  Brenda M Malinauskas; Victor G Aeby; Reginald F Overton; Tracy Carpenter-Aeby; Kimberly Barber-Heidal
Journal:  Nutr J       Date:  2007-10-31       Impact factor: 3.271

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.