Evidence Hub

Effects of Creatine Supplementation on Athletic Performance in Soccer Players: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

J. Mielgo-Ayuso, J. Calleja-González, D. Marqués-Jiménez, Alberto Caballero-García, A. Córdova, Diego Fernández-Lázaro

Nutrients, 2019

86 citations

Abstract

Studies have shown that creatine supplementation increases intramuscular creatine concentrations, favoring the energy system of phosphagens, which may help explain the observed improvements in high-intensity exercise performance. However, research on physical performance in soccer has shown controversial results, in part because the energy system used is not taken into account. The main aim of this investigation was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of creatine supplementation for increasing performance in skills related to soccer depending upon the type of metabolism used (aerobic, phosphagen, and anaerobic metabolism). A structured search was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines in the Medline/PubMed and Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases until January 2019. The search included studies with a double-blind and randomized experimental design in which creatine supplementation was compared to an identical placebo situation (dose, duration, timing, and drug appearance). There were no filters applied to the soccer players’ level, gender, or age. A final meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model and pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) (Hedges’s g). Nine studies published were included in the meta-analysis. This revealed that creatine supplementation did not present beneficial effects on aerobic performance tests (SMD,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free