Study Title and Description
Relationship of blood pressure, behavioral mood state, and physical activity following caffeine ingestion in younger and older women.
Key Questions Addressed
|1||For [population], is caffeine intake above [exposure dose], compared to intakes [exposure dose] or less, associated with adverse effects on behavior*?|
Primary Publication Information
|Title||Relationship of blood pressure, behavioral mood state, and physical activity following caffeine ingestion in younger and older women.|
|Author||PJ Arciero,MJ Ormsbee,|
Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.
Extraction Form: Behavior - Design Details - INCLUDED Studies
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.
|Question... Follow Up||Answer||Follow-up Answer|
|What outcome is being evaluated in this paper?||Behavior|
|What is the objective of the study (as reported by the authors)?||The purpose of this study was to examine the age-related differences in blood pressure, heart rate, and behavioral mood state after caffeine ingestion in younger and older women.|
|Provide a general description of the methods as reported by the authors. Information should be extracted based on relevance to the SR (i.e., caffeine related methods)||This research protocol was designed as a placebo-controlled double-blind test of caffeine (5 mg_x0002_.kg^–1 fat-free mass (FFM), equivalent to ~208–270 mg) and placebo (lactose) ingestion, completed in 2 separate treatment sessions sequenced in a randomized order and performed within a 1-month period. Caffeine was administered on a relative basis, according to FFM, primarily because caffeine enters organs and tissues of the body in direct proportion to their water content. Each subject participated in both treatment sessions, consisting of placebo or caffeine ingestion administered in pill form. Subjects ingested either placebo (lactose) or caffeine in pill form with 50 mL tepid water. Psychological mood state questionnaires (Profile of Mood States (POMS)) were assessed before and 90 min after the administration of placebo or caffeine treatment (Fig. 1). The POMS questionnaire (McNair et al. 1971), a standardized test that is sensitive to caffeine ingestion (Arciero et al. 1998), was administered to each subject before and 90 min after the ingestion of caffeine and placebo. The POMS test consists of 65 adjectives that describe a person’s mood state, based on a Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). When these 65 adjectives are analyzed, 6 factors are derived: tension-anxiety, depression-dejection, anger-hostility, vigor-activity, fatigue-inertia, and confusion-bewilderment.|
|How many outcome-specific endpoints are evaluated?||5|
|What is the (or one of the) endpoint(s) evaluated? (Each endpoint listed separately)||Tension-anxiety|
|List additional health endpoints (separately).||confusion-bewilderment|
|List additional health endpoints (separately)|
|What is the study design?||Controlled Trial|
|Randomized or Non-Randomized?||RCT|
|What were the diagnostics or methods used to measure the outcome?||Subjective|
|Optional: Name of Method or short description||Profile Of Mood State (POMS) questionnaire|
|Caffeine (general)||Caffeine (general)|
|What was the reference, comparison, or control group(s)? (e.g. high vs low consumption, number of cups, etc.)||Pre-caffeine ingestion vs. post-caffeine ingestion|
|What were the listed confounders or modifying factors as stated by the authors? (e.g. multi-variable components of models. Copy from methods)||Not stated|
|Provide a general description of results (as reported by the authors).||Resting baseline mood state values were not different in the placebo and caffeine trials within or between each group. Following caffeine ingestion, feelings of tension and vigor increased and feelings of fatigue decreased significantly (p<0.05) in younger women, whereas feelings of depression decreased significantly in older women (p < 0.05) (Table 3). Interestingly, following placebo ingestion, depression in younger women and tension in older women decreased significantly (p < 0.05) (data not shown).|
|Did the authors perform a dose-response analysis (or trend/related analysis)?||No|
|What were the authors's observations re: trend analysis?|
|What were the author's conclusions?||Following caffeine ingestion, we found a decrease in subjective feelings of depression in the older women, and an increase in vigor and tension and a decrease in fatigue in the younger women. Although others have shown similar favorable changes in mood state response following caffeine ingestion (Hasenfratz and Battig 1994; Kawachi et al. 1996; Swift and Tiplady 1988; Yu et al. 1991), to our knowledge, our study is the first to systematically examine changes in mood state in younger and older women using a double-blind placebo-controlled study design.|
|What were the sources of funding?||This study was supported by the Keck Foundation, Collaborative Research and Faculty Development Grants at Skidmore College.|
|What conflicts of interest were reported?||Not stated|
|Does the exposure (dose) need to be standardized to the SR?||No|
|Provide calculations/conversions for the exposure based on the decision tree in the guide (for all endpoints/exposure levels of interest).|
|List all the endpoint(s) followed by the dose (mg) which will be used in comparison to Nawrot. Characterize value as LOAEL/NOAEL, etc. if possible.||Tension LOAEL = 208-270 mg Depression NOAEL = 208-270 mg Anger NOAEL = 208-270 mg Fatigue NOAEL = 208-270 mg Confusion NOAEL = 208-270 mg|
|Notes regarding selection/listing of endpoints and exposures/doses to be compared to Nawrot.||The only adverse effect observed (increased tension) was in the sample of younger women. Depression, anger, fatigue, and confusion ratings were lower post-caffeine ingestion. Thus, NOAELs are reported for these endpoints. Further, caffeine administration was 5 mg/kg fat-free mass, which study authors converted to a range of 208-270 mg caffeine for the sample population. This study only included one exposure level.|
|What is the importance of the study with respect to the adverseness of the outcome?||Important|
No baseline characteristics have been defined for this extraction form.
Results & Comparisons
No Results found.
|Arm or Total||Title||Description||Comments|
No quality dimensions were specified.
No quality rating data was found.