How Cool is That? The Effects of Menthol Mouth Rinsing on Exercise Capacity and Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2024
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Dimensions
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SPRINGER
Autores
GAVEL, Erica H.
BARRETO, Gabriel
HAWKE, Kierstyn V.
STELLINGWERFF, Trent
JAMES, Lewis J.
LOGAN-SPRENGER, Heather M.
Citação
SPORTS MEDICINE-OPEN, v.10, n.1, article ID 18, 14p, 2024
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Menthol (MEN) mouth rinsing (MR) has gained considerable interest in the athletic population for exercise performance; however, the overall magnitude of effect is unknown. Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of menthol MEN MR and the impact it has on exercise capacity and performance. Methods Three databases were searched with articles screened according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Three-level meta-analyses were used to investigate the overall efficacy of MEN MR and the impact it has on exercise capacity and performance. Meta-regressions were then performed with 1) mean VO2(peak), 2) MEN swilling duration; 3) the MEN concentration of MR solution, 4) the number of executed swills throughout a single experiment, 5) the use of flavoured sweetened, non-caloric, or non-flavoured neutral solutions as controls, 6) mean environmental temperature at the time of exercise tests, and 7) exercise type as fixed factors to evaluate their influence on the effects of MEN MR. Results Ten MEN MR studies included sufficient information pertaining to MEN MR and exercise performance and capacity. MR with MEN resulted in no significant change in capacity and performance (SMD = 0.12; 95% CI - 0.08, 0.31; p = 0.23, n = 1, tau(2)1 < 0.0001, tau(2)2 = < 0.0001, I-2 = 0%). No significant influence was detected in meta-regressions for VO2(peak), (estimate: 0.03; df = 8; 95% CI - 0.03, 0.09; p = 0.27), swilling duration (5 vs. 10 s: 0.00; df = 16; 95% CI - 0.41, 0.41; p = 1.0), MEN concentration (low [0.01%] vs. high [0.1%]: - 0.08; df = 15; 95% CI - 0.49, 0.32; p = 0.67), number of swills (estimate: 0.02; df = 13; 95% CI - 0.05, 0.09; p = 0.56), the use of flavoured sweetener or non-caloric as control (non-flavoured vs. flavoured: 0.12; df = 16; 95% CI - 0.30, 0.55; p = 0.55) or mean room temperature during exercise tests (estimate: 0.01; df = 16; 95% CI - 0.02, 0.04; p = 0.62). Conclusion MEN MR did not significantly improve overall exercise capacity and performance, though those involved in endurance exercise may see benefits.
Palavras-chave
Menthol, Mouth rinsing, Exercise, Capacity, Performance
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/59109
Referências
  1. Barwood MJ, 2020, SPORTS MED, V50, P1709, DOI 10.1007/s40279-020-01313-9
  2. Best R, 2021, NUTRIENTS, V13, DOI 10.3390/nu13124309
  3. Best R, 2021, BEVERAGES, V7, DOI 10.3390/beverages7030062
  4. Best R, 2020, SPORTS, V8, DOI 10.3390/sports8060090
  5. Best R, 2018, SPORTS, V6, DOI 10.3390/sports6010011
  6. Betts JA, 2020, INT J SPORT NUTR EXE, V30, P2, DOI 10.1123/ijsnem.2019-0326
  7. Borenstein M. R. H., 2009, Introduction to meta-analysis, DOI [DOI 10.1002/9780470743386, 10.1002/9780470743386.ch6, DOI 10.1002/9780470743386.CH6, 10.1002/9780470743386.ch13]
  8. Che Muhamed Ahmad Munir, 2016, Temperature (Austin), V3, P455, DOI 10.1080/23328940.2016.1182669
  9. Crosby S, 2022, INT J ENV RES PUB HE, V19, DOI 10.3390/ijerph19063527
  10. da Silva WV, 2014, NUTR HOSP, V29, P158, DOI 10.3305/nh.2014.29.1.6853
  11. Eccles R, 2000, APPETITE, V34, P29, DOI 10.1006/appe.1999.0291
  12. Flood TR, 2017, EUR J APPL PHYSIOL, V117, P1501, DOI 10.1007/s00421-017-3645-6
  13. Foster C, 2009, BRIT J SPORT MED, V43, P765, DOI 10.1136/bjsm.2008.054841
  14. Gavel EH, 2021, FRONT NUTR, V8, DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.691695
  15. Gavel EH, 2021, INT J SPORT PHYSIOL, V16, P1014, DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2020-0414
  16. Gibson OR, 2019, EUR J APPL PHYSIOL, V119, P653, DOI 10.1007/s00421-018-4055-0
  17. Guest S, 2007, PHYSIOL BEHAV, V92, P975, DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.07.004
  18. Guyatt GH, 2008, BRIT MED J, V336, P924, DOI 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
  19. Hibbert AW, 2017, FRONT PHYSIOL, V8, DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00488
  20. Higgins Julian P T, 2011, BMJ, V343, pd5928, DOI 10.1136/bmj.d5928
  21. James RM, 2017, INT J SPORT NUTR EXE, V27, P25, DOI 10.1123/ijsnem.2016-0111
  22. Jeffries O, 2019, J SCI MED SPORT, V22, P707, DOI 10.1016/j.jsams.2018.12.002
  23. Jeffries O, 2018, EUR J APPL PHYSIOL, V118, P2435, DOI 10.1007/s00421-018-3970-4
  24. Jerram ML., 2023, Int J Sports Physiol Perform, V909, P1
  25. Lin LF, 2018, BIOMETRICS, V74, P785, DOI 10.1111/biom.12817
  26. Maughan RJ, 2018, BRIT J SPORT MED, V52, P439, DOI 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099027
  27. Mears SA, 2018, INT J SPORT PHYSIOL, V13, P504, DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2017-0318
  28. Mündel T, 2010, EUR J APPL PHYSIOL, V109, P59, DOI 10.1007/s00421-009-1180-9
  29. Page MJ., 2021, INT J SURG, V88, DOI [DOI 10.1016/J.IJSU.2021.105906, DOI 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003]
  30. Parton AJ, 2021, PHYSIOL BEHAV, V229, DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113250
  31. Rosenthal R., 2008, Essentials of behavior research. Methods and data analysis
  32. Saldaris JM, 2020, SCAND J MED SCI SPOR, V30, P801, DOI 10.1111/sms.13623
  33. Saunders B, 2017, SCAND J MED SCI SPOR, V27, P1240, DOI 10.1111/sms.12793
  34. Saunders B, 2019, PLOS ONE, V14, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0222982
  35. Schlader ZJ, 2011, PHYSIOL BEHAV, V103, P217, DOI 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.02.002
  36. Sinclair J, Eur J Sport Sci.
  37. Sterne JAC, 2019, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V366, DOI 10.1136/bmj.l4898
  38. Stevens CJ, 2016, SCAND J MED SCI SPOR, V26, P1209, DOI 10.1111/sms.12555
  39. Stevens CJ, 2017, J STRENGTH COND RES, V31, P620, DOI 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001532
  40. Stevens CJ, 2017, J SPORT SCI, V35, P798, DOI 10.1080/02640414.2016.1192294

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/Outros