Quick Links

Recommendations Summary

EE: Caffeine and Stimulants in Healthy and Non-Critically Ill 2014

Click here to see the explanation of recommendation ratings (Strong, Fair, Weak, Consensus, Insufficient Evidence) and labels (Imperative or Conditional). To see more detail on the evidence from which the following recommendations were drawn, use the hyperlinks in the Supporting Evidence Section below.

  • Recommendation(s)

    EE: Caffeine and Stimulants in Healthy Adults

    The registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN) should ensure that a healthy adult refrains from ingesting caffeine or other stimulants for at least four hours prior to a resting metabolic rate (RMR) measurement. Ingestion of caffeine and other stimulants in healthy adults increases RMR for longer than four hours.

    Rating: Fair

    • Risks/Harms of Implementing This Recommendation

      A four-hour abstinence from caffeine or other stimulants may be difficult for some individuals.

    • Conditions of Application

      • Clinical judgment should be used in applying this recommendation to healthy children and non-critically ill children and adults, due to no evidence in these populations
      • Refraining overnight from caffeine and other stimulants is advised.

    • Potential Costs Associated with Application

      If an individual consumes caffeine or other stimulant products within four hours prior to the RMR measurement, additional costs may be incurred because the measurement will need to be rescheduled.  

    • Recommendation Narrative

      EE: Caffeine and Stimulants in Healthy Adults

      • The six studies reviewed provide evidence in healthy adults that caffeine and other selected stimulants increase RMR for at least four hours. The duration of an increased RMR after ingestion of caffeine or other stimulants is unknown.
      • Research identifying the duration of elevated RMR after ingestion of caffeine and other stimulants is needed
      • Evidence is based on the following:
        • Three neutral-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (Arciero et al, 2000; Belza et al, 2007; and Greenway et al, 2004)
        • Two neutral-quality randomized crossover trials (Belza et al, 2009; Kamatsu et al, 2003)
        • One neutral-quality nonrandomized controlled trial (Yoshida et al, 1994).

    • Recommendation Strength Rationale

      Conclusion statement supporting this recommendation is Grade III.

    • Minority Opinions