Revisiting the evidence on caffeine mouth rinse: effects on exercise and cognitive performance: a meta-analytic review.

Habitual caffeine consumption protects against depression but through unclear mechanisms. Although habitual caffeine use predicts cortisol release in response to other acute stressors (e.g., exercise), this is less examined with lab-based psychosocial stress in healthy adults. Furthermore, caffeine-induced cortisol increases may mask theory-predicted cortisol blunting to robust stress in people with elevated depression risk. In two samples, we tested whether acute (same-day) and habitual caffeine use would predict greater cortisol reactivity to lab-based stress, and whether caffeine would "mask" the effect of a depression risk factor, trait rumination, on blunted cortisol reactivity. In sample 1, N = 128 emerging adults completed one of three Trier Social Stress Test conditions: nonevaluative control, ambiguously evaluative intermediate, or explicit negative evaluative. In sample 2, N = 148 emerging adults completed either a control or negative evaluative condition. In both samples, multilevel growth curve modeling indicated that habitual caffeine use ( t = -1.99, p = .048; t = -2.73, p = .007, samples 1 and 2, respectively) but not acute caffeine use predicted heightened cortisol reactivity as a function of condition. In sample 1, the relationship between condition, rumination, and blunted cortisol was evident only in caffeine nonusers, which differed from users ( t = 2.82, p = .005), but in sample 2, the predicted blunting pattern was evident regardless of caffeine use. The results provide evidence that habitual caffeine use is associated with greater cortisol release under psychosocial lab-based stress and may mask the influence of psychosocial variables; future research should examine whether habitual caffeine-induced cortisol release has behaviorally activating effects that protect against depression.

Caffeine ingestion can improve performance across a variety of exercise modalities but can also elicit negative side effects in some individuals. Thus, there is a growing interest in the use of caffeine mouth rinse solutions to improve sport and exercise performance while minimizing caffeine's potentially adverse effects. Mouth rinse protocols involve swilling a solution within the oral cavity for a short time (e.g.,5-10s) before expectorating it to avoid systemic absorption. This is believed to improve performance via activation of taste receptors and stimulation of the central nervous system. Although reviews of the literature indicate that carbohydrate mouth rinsing can improve exercise performance in some situations, there has been no attempt to systematically review the available literature on caffeine mouth rinsing and its effects on exercise performance. To fill this gap, a systematic literature search of three databases (PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) was conducted by two independent reviewers. The search resulted in 11 randomized crossover studies that were appraised and reviewed. Three studies found significant positive effects of caffeine mouth rinsing on exercise performance, whereas the remaining eight found no improvements or only suggestive benefits. The mixed results may be due to heterogeneity in the methods across studies, interindividual differences in bitter tasting, and differences in the concentrations of caffeine solutions. Future studies should evaluate how manipulating the concentration of caffeine solutions, habitual caffeine intake, and genetic modifiers of bitter taste influence the efficacy of caffeine mouth rinsing as an ergogenic strategy.

Several pre-workout supplements contain niacin, although the exercise performance effects of niacin are poorly understood. The purpose of the present study was to examine the performance effects of niacin versus caffeine as a pre-workout supplement. Twenty-five untrained males were recruited to complete three identical ramped aerobic cycling exercise trials. Participants were administered caffeine (CA) at 5 mg/kg body weight, 1000 mg niacin (NI), or a methylcelluloce placebo (PL) supplement prior to each trial. NI treatment induced significantly higher respiratory exchange ratio (RER) during exercise compared to the CA treatment, but not the PL treatment (PL=0.87±0.08, NI=0.91±0.08, CA=0.87±0.08; p=0.02). Similarly, exercise time to exhaustion (in minutes) was significantly different between the NI treatment and the CA treatment, but not the PL treatment (PL=27.45±4.47, NI=26.30±4.91, CA=28.76±4.86; p<0.01). Habitual caffeine use (p=0.16), habitual aerobic exercise (p=0.60), and habitual resistance exercise (p=0.10) did not significantly affect RER. Similarly, habitual caffeine use (p=0.72), habitual aerobic exercise (p=0.08), and habitual resistance exercise (p=0.39) did not significantly affect total work performed. The elevated RER and decreased time to exhaustion in the NI treatment suggests limited lipid availability during exercise and impaired exercise performance.

Caffeine is a widely utilized performance-enhancing supplement used by athletes and non-athletes alike. In recent years, a number of meta-analyses have demonstrated that caffeine’s ergogenic effects on exercise performance are well-established and well-replicated, appearing consistent across a broad range of exercise modalities. As such, it is clear that caffeine is an ergogenic aid—but can we further explore the context of this ergogenic aid in order to better inform practice? We propose that future research should aim to better understand the nuances of caffeine use within sport and exercise. Here, we propose a number of areas for exploration within future caffeine research. These include an understanding of the effects of training status, habitual caffeine use, time of day, age, and sex on caffeine ergogenicity, as well as further insight into the modifying effects of genotype. We also propose that a better understanding of the wider, non-direct effects of caffeine on exercise, such as how it modifies sleep, anxiety, and post-exercise recovery, will ensure athletes can maximize the performance benefits of caffeine supplementation during both training and competition. Whilst not exhaustive, we hope that the questions provided within this manuscript will prompt researchers to explore areas with the potential to have a large impact on caffeine use in the future.

Caffeine is a well-established ergogenic aid, demonstrated to enhance performance across a wide range of capacities through a variety of mechanisms. As such, it is frequently used by both athletes and non-athletes alike. As a result, caffeine ingestion is ubiquitous in modern society, with athletes typically being exposed to regular non-supplemental caffeine through a variety of sources. Previously, it has been suggested that regular caffeine use may lead to habituation and subsequently a reduction in the expected ergogenic effects, thereby blunting caffeine’s performance-enhancing impact during critical training and performance events. In order to mitigate this expected performance loss, some practitioners recommended a pre-competition withdrawal period to restore the optimal performance benefits of caffeine supplementation. However, at present the evidence base exploring both caffeine habituation and withdrawal strategies in athletes is surprisingly small. Accordingly, despite the prevalence of caffeine use within athletic populations, formulating evidence-led guidelines is difficult. Here, we review the available research regarding habitual caffeine use in athletes and seek to derive rational interpretations of what is currently known—and what else we need to know—regarding habitual caffeine use in athletes, and how athletes and performance staff may pragmatically approach these important, complex, and yet under-explored phenomena.

Caffeine is the most widely used psychoactive substance in the world and is known to disrupt healthy sleep. However, very few studies have directly tested the effect of caffeine abstinence on sleep, and these have yielded inconsistent findings. The purpose of the present study was to examine changes in sleep following caffeine abstinence and examine the extent to which characteristics of habitual caffeine use moderated this change. Participants included 66 healthy, young adults with habitual caffeine use and poor sleep. During the 2-week baseline, sleep was assessed using wrist actigraphy and daily caffeine use was assessed with bedtime diaries. Eligible participants then completed 1week of caffeine abstinence, during which sleep was measured with wrist actigraphy. Multilevel models found no significant differences between either mean levels or growth trajectories of total sleep time or sleep efficiency between baseline and caffeine abstinence. Mean levels of sleep onset latency also did not differ between baseline and caffeine abstinence. A small but significant quadratic effect was observed, such that sleep onset latency decreased during the first few days of caffeine abstinence, then increased to levels above baseline. Characteristics of caffeine use did not moderate changes in sleep between baseline and caffeine abstinence. These data suggest that abstaining from caffeine may not result in long-term sleep improvement for habitual caffeine users, which contradicts the common sleep health recommendation. The present findings encourage more rigorous investigation of the effectiveness of caffeine restriction on sleep.

Effects of caffeine and gender on physiology and performance: Further tests of a biobehavioral model

Caffeine was reported to increase blood pressure 70 years ago.1 Research into the cardiovascular effects of caffeine entered the modern era with a 1978 publication by Robertson et al,2 who noted increases in plasma catecholamines and renin in association with a pressor response to caffeine. In their study, caffeine was administered as a single dose equivalent to 2 to 3 cups of coffee to 9 healthy, non-coffee drinking, young subjects under carefully controlled laboratory conditions. The authors presumably selected caffeine-naive subjects to avoid pharmacological tolerance to caffeine and to maximize its cardiovascular and adrenomedullary actions. This approach was to set the pattern for research on the effects of caffeine on blood pressure over the next 25 years. Despite numerous studies in the intervening period, it is still not certain if caffeine increases blood pressure only under ideal laboratory conditions or if it causes a clinically important pressor response with regular use during usual daily activities. Much of the controversy surrounding the impact of caffeine on blood pressure derives from the rapid development of tolerance to its effects that appear after only 1 or 2 days of regular consumption.3 Several studies have reported that caffeine is still capable of increasing blood pressure despite regular previous use. However, in some instances, serum caffeine concentrations immediately before ingestion of caffeine in the laboratory were close to 0, suggesting that subjects had not consumed caffeine for at least 24 hours.4–7 In these experiments, subjects were asked to abstain from caffeine for specific periods (minimum 12 hours) before the acute challenge, leaving open the possibility that they were supercompliers, having actually abstained for an even longer period, thus losing some of the tolerance that was …

Caffeine is the most widely consumed psychoactive stimulant worldwide and acts primarily through antagonism of adenosine A1 and A2A receptors, thereby reducing sleep pressure and promoting wakefulness. Although its alerting and performance-enhancing effects are well established, its influence on sleep-related electroencephalography (EEG) has been investigated across diverse paradigms with substantial methodological heterogeneity. This systematic and mechanistic review aimed to synthesize human evidence on how caffeine affects sleep architecture, quantitative sleep EEG, and neurophysiological markers of sleep homeostasis, and to interpret these findings within current models of adenosine-mediated sleep-wake regulation. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PsycINFO, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar was conducted for studies published between January 1980 and January 2026, with the final search performed on 10 January 2026. Eligible studies were original human investigations examining caffeine exposure or administration and reporting sleep-related EEG outcomes, including polysomnographic sleep staging, spectral EEG analyses, or other EEG-derived sleep metrics. Two reviewers independently screened records and assessed eligibility, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Data on study design, participant characteristics, caffeine interventions, EEG methodology, and outcomes were extracted using a predefined form. Risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Owing to marked heterogeneity across studies, findings were synthesized narratively within a mechanistic interpretive framework. Thirty-two studies were included. Across highly heterogeneous paradigms-including acute bedtime or evening dosing, daytime or repeated caffeine use before nocturnal sleep, administration during prolonged wakefulness followed by recovery sleep, withdrawal protocols, and ambulatory/home EEG monitoring-the most consistent finding was suppression of low-frequency NREM EEG activity, particularly slow-wave activity and the lowest delta frequencies. Caffeine frequently increased faster EEG activity, including sigma/spindle and beta ranges, producing a lighter, more aroused, and more wake-like sleep EEG profile. These effects were especially prominent during early-night NREM sleep and in recovery sleep after sleep deprivation, where caffeine attenuated the expected homeostatic rebound in low-frequency power. REM-related effects were less consistent, but some studies reported delayed REM timing and subtler alterations in REM EEG. Emerging evidence further suggests that caffeine increases EEG complexity and shifts sleep dynamics toward a more excitation-dominant state. Several studies indicated that quantitative EEG measures were more sensitive than conventional sleep-stage variables in detecting caffeine-related sleep disruption. Dose, timing, habitual caffeine use, withdrawal state, age, circadian context, and adenosinergic genetic variation, particularly involving ADORA2A, moderated the magnitude of effects. We also highlighted the connection between current results and sports and sports science. Caffeine reliably alters the neurophysiological architecture of human sleep in a direction consistent with reduced sleep depth and weakened homeostatic recovery. The overall evidence supports a mechanistic model centered on adenosine receptor antagonism, attenuation of sleep-pressure build-up and expression, and a shift toward greater cortical arousal during sleep. Sleep EEG appears to be a sensitive marker of these effects, often revealing physiological disruption even when conventional sleep architecture changes are modest. Future research should prioritize larger and more diverse samples, pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenetic characterization, and ecologically valid high-resolution sleep monitoring to clarify the real-world and functional consequences of caffeine-induced EEG changes.

Van De Walle, GP and Vukovich, MD. The effect of nitrate supplementation on exercise tolerance and performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 32(6): 1796-1808, 2018-The purpose of this article was to systematically review the current literature and evaluate the overall efficacy of nitrate supplementation on exercise tolerance and performance by meta-analysis. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (a) were an experimental trial published in an English peer-reviewed journal; (b) compared the effects of inorganic nitrate consumption with a non-bioactive supplement control or placebo; (c) used a quantifiable measure of exercise performance; and (d) was carried out in apparently healthy participants without disease. A total of 29 studies were identified that investigated the effects of nitrate supplementation on exercise tolerance or performance in accordance with the criteria outlined. Analysis using time to exhaustion as the outcome variable revealed a significant effect of nitrate supplementation on exercise tolerance (ES = 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.47; p = 0.006) compared with placebo. Analysis using time to complete a specific distance as the outcome variable revealed no significant effect of nitrate supplementation on exercise performance (ES = -0.05; 95% CI: -0.28 to 0.17; p = 0.64) compared with placebo. Nitrate supplementation is likely to improve exercise tolerance and capacity that may improve exercise performance. More research is required to determine the optimal dose and duration of nitrate supplementation. It would also be important to consider the type of athlete performing the exercise and the duration, intensity, and mode of the exercise performed because these factors are likely to influence the efficacy of nitrate supplementation.

Precooling is a popular strategy used to combat the debilitating effects of heat-stress-induced fatigue and extend the period in which an individual can tolerate a heat-gaining environment. Interest in precooling prior to sporting activity has increased over the past three decades, with options including the application (external) and ingestion (internal) of cold modalities including air, water and/or ice, separately or in combination, immediately prior to exercise. Although many studies have observed improvements in exercise capacity or performance following precooling, some strategies are more logistically challenging than others, and thus are often impractical for use in competition or field settings. The purpose of this article was to comprehensively evaluate the established precooling literature, which addresses the application of cooling strategies that are likely to enhance field-based sports performance, while discussing the practical and logistical issues associated with these methods. We undertook a narrative examination that focused on the practical and event-specific application of precooling and its effect on physiological parameters and performance. Relevant precooling literature was located through the PubMed database with second- and third-order reference lists manually cross matched for relevant journal articles. The last day of the literature search was 31 January 2012. Relevant studies were included on the basis of conforming to strict criteria, including the following: (i) cooling was conducted before exercise; (ii) cooling was conducted during the performance task in a manner that was potentially achievable during sports competition; (iii) a measure of athletic performance was assessed; (iv) subjects included were able bodied, and free of diseases or disorders that would affect thermoregulation; (v) subjects were endurance-trained humans (maximal oxygen uptake [[Formula: see text]O(2max)] >50ml/kg/min for endurance protocols); (vi) cooling was not performed on already hyperthermic subjects that were in immediate danger of heat-related illnesses or had received passive heating treatments; (vii) drink ingestion protocols were used for the intended purpose of benefiting thermoregulation as a result of beverage temperature; and (viii) investigations employed≥six subjects. Initial searches yielded 161 studies, but 106 were discarded on failing to meet the established criteria. This final summary evaluated 74 precooling treatments, across 55 studies employing well trained subjects. Key physiological and performance information from each study was extracted and presented, and includes respective subject characteristics, detailed precooling methods, exercise protocols, environmental conditions, along with physiological and performance outcomes. Data were presented in comparison to respective control treatments. For studies that include more than one treatment intervention, the comparative results between each precooling treatment were also presented. The practical benefits and limitations of employing each strategy in the field and in relation to sports performance were summarized. Clear evidence of the benefits for a range of precooling strategies undertaken in the laboratory setting exists, which suggest that these strategies could be employed by athletes who compete in hot environmental conditions to improve exercise safety, reduce their perceived thermal stress and improve sports performance. This review did not include a systematic assessment of the study quality rating and provided a subjective assessment of the pooled outcomes of studies, which range in precooling methodologies and exercise outcomes. The wide range of research designs, precooling methods, environmental conditions and exercise protocols make it difficult to integrate all the available research into single findings. Most laboratory studies have shown improvements in exercise performance following precooling and the emergence of strategies that are practically relevant to the field setting now allow scientists to individualize relevant strategies for teams and individuals at competition locations. Future research is warranted to investigate the effectiveness of practical precooling strategies in competition or field settings.

Acute caffeine ingestion can improve exercise performance. Interplay between caffeine habituation and training status on the performance-enhancing effect of caffeine is unknown. Habitual caffeine consumption and training status affect the ergogenicity of pre-exercise caffeine intake on exercise performance. Double-blind, placebo-controlled, counterbalanced experimental design. Level 3. Eighty physically inactive men were randomized into 1 of 4 groups: caffeine supplementation (CAF), caffeine supplementation + exercise training (CAFEXE), placebo (PLA), and placebo + exercise training (PLAEXE); high-intensity interval training and caffeine were administered for 9 and 8 weeks, respectively. Data were collected pre-test, mid-test, post-test, and delayed post-test, each including 2 experiment sessions (3 mg/kg caffeine or placebo), with an additional experiment session post-test (6 mg/kg caffeine). In each experiment session, 45-min after consuming a placebo or caffeine, a 3-km running test and a Wingate power test were performed. Pre-exercise ingestion of 3 mg/kg caffeine improved 3-km running time and mean power output (MPO) in all groups at all stages (P < 0.05); this effect was higher in trained than in untrained volunteers (P < 0.05). Habitual caffeine consumption reduced the ergogenic effect of caffeine in both aerobic and anaerobic trials (P < 0.05); 6 mg/kg caffeine enhanced this decrease only in CAFEXE (P < 0.05). Short-term caffeine withdrawal augmented the reduced ergogenic effect of caffeine on 3-km running performance and MPO in CAF and CAFEXE (P < 0.05). Habituation to caffeine and training status could partially influence the ergogenic effects of caffeine on exercise performance. Regular caffeine consumption leads to some degree of tolerance and decreases its ergogenicity. A pre-exercise increase in caffeine dosage in trained people and short-term caffeine withdrawal in both trained and untrained people could compensate for the reduced caffeine ergogenicity in young men.

Should Protein Be Included in CHO-Based Sports Supplements?

Background: The benefits of caffeine to physical performance have been extensively demonstrated, however, it has recently been speculated that there is an effect of the administration route on its effectiveness. Purpose: The current study investigated the effect of caffeine mouth rinse in isolation or combined with ingestion on performance in a 30-minute constant-load exercise followed by a 10-km cycling time trial. Methods: Ten physically active men performed a 30-minute constant-load exercise at 50% of the graded test Wmax, followed by a 10-km cycling time trial. Before and at the middle points of the constant-load exercise and 10-km cycling time trial, the following conditions were administered: PLA (cellulose ingestion plus mouth rinsing with magnesium sulfate), ING (5 mg.kg−1 of caffeine ingestion plus mouth rinsing with magnesium sulfate), MR (cellulose ingestion plus mouth rinsing with 1.2% caffeine), and COMB (5 mg.kg−1 of caffeine ingestion plus mouth rinsing with 1.2% caffeine). Results: During the 30-minute constant-load exercise, COMB presented a lower rating of perceived exertion (RPE) than MR (p = .04). For the 10-km time trial, the COMB was faster than MR (MR = 1363 ± 345 vs. COMB = 1291 ± 308s, Δ% = 5.57, p = .05). Mean power output was higher in COMB than PLA, ING, and MR (234 ± 15 vs. 169 ± 29, 148 ± 11, and 145 ± 12 W, respectively). There were no differences between conditions for heart rate and RPE during the 10-km time trial. Conclusion: In summary, caffeine mouth rinsing potentiated the effects of caffeine ingestion during the 10-km time trial compared to caffeine mouth rinsing alone.

SummaryThe potential untoward consequences of habitual caffeine use are considered in terms of two broad classes of deleterious effects: (a) the symptom constellation known as‘caffeinism', and (b) a number of disease states in which caffeine may be an etiological factor. In addition, a brief overview is provided of recent attempts to assist heavy users to reduce caffeine intake to moderate and presumably safer levels.