Lam Fui-Ching, Bukhsh Allah, Rehman Habib, Waqas Muhammad Khurram, Shahid Nabeel, Khaliel Adil Mohammed, Elhanish Ahlam, Karoud Mustfa, Telb Ahmed, Khan Tahir Mehmood
School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Subang Jaya, Malaysia.
Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan.
Front Pharmacol. 2019 Apr 24;10:317. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00317. eCollection 2019.
Athletes train physically to reach beyond their potential maximum aerobic threshold. Whey protein supplements (WPS) are often used in conjunction with physiotherapy and psychotherapy to regain better vital sign and physical performances. This review aimed to explore the clinical evidence on the efficacy and safety of WPS in sports performance and recovery among athletes. A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant randomized control trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy and safety of WPS on the vital sign and physical performance among athletes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Assessment tools were used to assess the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using the frequentist model with STATA version 14.2®. A total of 333,257 research articles were identified out of which 20 RCTs were included for qualitative synthesis and network meta-analysis with 351 participants. Among the studies, 7 had low ROB and 3 RCTs had high ROB. Of these 20 trials, 16 trials were randomized clinical trials which compared whey protein supplements (WPS) with various comparators i.e., L-alanine, bovine colostrum, carbohydrate, casein, leucine, maltodextrin, rice, protein + caffeine were compared with placebo. Analysis from the pairwise meta-analysis revealed that for respiratory exchange ratio (RER) WPS was found to be significantly improving compared to maltodextrin (WMD = 0.012; 95%CI = 0.001, 0.023). Similarity to RPE (Rate Perceived Exertion), slight difference between WPS and the comparators, however, when the estimation was favorable to the comparators, there was moderate-high heterogeneity. For , high heterogeneity appeared when WPS compared to maltodextrin with the = 97.8% (WMD = 4.064; 95% CI = -4.230, 12.359), meanwhile bovine colostrum (WMD = -2.658; 95%CI = -6.180, 0.865) only comparator that was better than WPS. According to the estimated effect of the supplements on physical performance outcome results, maximum power (8 studies, 185 athletes), highest ranked was bovine colostrum (SUCRA = 70.7%) and the lowest ranked was placebo (SUCRA = 17.9%), yet all insignificant. Then again, on average power (nine studies, 187 athletes), WPS was the highest ranked (SUCRA = 75.4 %) about -112.00 watt (-187.91, -36.08) and most of the estimations were significant. Body mass was reported in 10 studies (171 athletes), carbohydrate may be at the highest ranked (SUCRA = 66.9%) but it is insignificant. Thought the second highest ranked was WPS (SUCRA = 64.7%) and it is significant (WMD = -6.89 kg; CI = -8.24, -5.54). The findings of this review support the efficacy and safety of WPS as an ergogenic aid on athletes' sports performance and recovery. The overall quality of clinical evidence was found to be valid and reliable from the comprehensive search strategy and ROB assessment.
运动员通过体能训练来突破其潜在的最大有氧阈值。乳清蛋白补充剂(WPS)常与物理治疗和心理治疗相结合,以恢复更好的生命体征和身体表现。本综述旨在探讨WPS对运动员运动表现和恢复的有效性及安全性的临床证据。进行了全面的文献检索,以确定相关的随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验研究了WPS对运动员生命体征和身体表现的有效性及安全性。使用Cochrane偏倚风险(ROB)评估工具来评估研究质量。采用频率学派模型和STATA 14.2®进行荟萃分析。共识别出333,257篇研究文章,其中20项RCT被纳入进行定性综合分析和网络荟萃分析,涉及351名参与者。在这些研究中,7项研究的偏倚风险较低,3项RCT的偏倚风险较高。在这20项试验中,16项为随机临床试验,将乳清蛋白补充剂(WPS)与各种对照物进行比较,即L-丙氨酸、牛初乳、碳水化合物、酪蛋白、亮氨酸、麦芽糊精、大米、蛋白质+咖啡因与安慰剂进行比较。成对荟萃分析的结果显示,对于呼吸交换率(RER),与麦芽糊精相比,WPS有显著改善(加权均数差[WMD]=0.012;95%置信区间[CI]=0.001,0.023)。与自感用力度(RPE)类似,WPS与对照物之间存在细微差异,然而,当估计结果有利于对照物时,存在中度至高度异质性。对于[此处原文缺失具体指标],与麦芽糊精相比,WPS存在高度异质性,异质性为97.8%(WMD = 4.064;95% CI = -4.230,12.359),同时牛初乳(WMD = -2.658;95% CI = -6.180,0.865)是唯一比WPS更好的对照物。根据补充剂对身体表现结果的估计效应,最大功率(8项研究,185名运动员)方面,排名最高的是牛初乳(累积排序曲线下面积[SUCRA]=70.7%),排名最低的是安慰剂(SUCRA = 17.9%),但均无显著性差异。再者,在平均功率(9项研究,187名运动员)方面,WPS排名最高(SUCRA = 75.4%),约为-112.00瓦(-187.91,-36.08),且大多数估计结果具有显著性。10项研究(171名运动员)报告了体重,碳水化合物可能排名最高(SUCRA = 66.9%),但无显著性差异。其次排名第二的是WPS(SUCRA = 64.7%),具有显著性(WMD = -6.89 kg;CI = -8.24,-5.54)。本综述的结果支持WPS作为一种提高运动能力的辅助剂对运动员运动表现和恢复的有效性及安全性。从全面的检索策略和ROB评估来看,临床证据的整体质量是有效且可靠的。