Rhodiola rosea for physical and mental fatigue: a systematic review
Ishaque S, Shamseer L, Bukutu C, Vohra S
Published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Vol. 12, pp. 70
Methodology
Systematic review of 11 randomised and controlled clinical trials of R. rosea for physical and mental fatigue, with independent screening, data extraction and risk-of-bias assessment.
Key Findings
Two of six trials examining physical fatigue in healthy populations reported R. rosea to be effective, as did three of five RCTs evaluating mental fatigue. All included studies showed high or unclear risk of bias.
Conclusions
Evidence on R. rosea for fatigue is contradictory and the trial base is methodologically weak; efficacy cannot be considered established.
Limitations
All included trials had high or unclear risk of bias; heterogeneous extracts, doses and outcome measures.
Supplements Studied
Two of six trials examining physical fatigue in healthy populations report R. rosea to be effective as did three of five RCTs evaluating R. rosea for mental fatigue.
Outcomes Measured
Two of six trials examining physical fatigue in healthy populations report R. rosea to be effective.
Three of five RCTs evaluating R. rosea for mental fatigue reported it to be effective.
Two of six trials examining physical fatigue in healthy populations report R. rosea to be effective as did three of five RCTs evaluating R. rosea for mental fatigue.
Some trials reported reduced fatigue and improved drive, but methodological quality was low and results inconsistent
Trial quality was low and results inconsistent, so efficacy for fatigue and self-rated performance could not be confirmed
Trial quality was low and results inconsistent, so efficacy for fatigue could not be confirmed
Related Health Concerns
Study Details
Access Study
Disclosures
Funding
Not reported
This information is for educational purposes only. Always consult a healthcare professional before starting any supplement regimen.