4.7 Article

Caffeine Supplementation Improves Anaerobic Performance and Neuromuscular Efficiency and Fatigue in Olympic-Level Boxers

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11092120

关键词

anaerobic; caffeine; CMJ; ergogenic aids; exercise; nutrition; sport supplement; Wingate; electromyography; efficiency

资金

  1. Fundacion Universidad Alfonso X el Sabio
  2. Banco Santander

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: this study examined the effects of caffeine supplementation on anaerobic performance, neuromuscular efficiency and upper and lower extremities fatigue in Olympic-level boxers. Methods: Eight male athletes, members of the Spanish National Olympic Team, were enrolled in the study. In a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, counterbalanced, crossover design, the athletes completed 2 test sessions after the intake of caffeine (6 mg center dot kg(-1)) or placebo. Sessions involved initial measures of lactate, handgrip and countermovement jump (CMJ) performance, followed by a 30-seconds Wingate test, and then final measures of the previous variables. During the sessions, electromiography (EMG) data were recorded on the gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, vastus lateralis, gastrocnemius lateral head and tibialis anterior. Results: caffeine enhanced peak power (6.27%, p < 0.01; Effect Size (ES) = 1.26), mean power (5.21%; p < 0.01; ES = 1.29) and reduced the time needed to reach peak power (-9.91%, p < 0.01; ES = 0.58) in the Wingate test, improved jump height in the CMJ (+2.4 cm, p < 0.01), and improved neuromuscular efficiency at peak power in the vastus lateralis (ES = 1.01) and gluteus maximus (ES = 0.89), and mean power in the vastus lateralis (ES = 0.95) and tibialis anterior (ES = 0.83). Conclusions: in these Olympic-level boxers, caffeine supplementation improved anaerobic performance without affecting EMG activity and fatigue levels in the lower limbs. Further benefits observed were enhanced neuromuscular efficiency in some muscles and improved reaction speed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据