The effectiveness of daily and alternate day oral iron supplementation in athletes with suboptimal iron status (part 2)

Rachel McCormick, Alex Dreyer, Brian Dawson, Marc Sim, Leanne Lester, Carmel Goodman, Peter Peeling

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The authors compared the effectiveness of daily (DAY) versus alternate day (ALT) oral iron supplementation in athletes with suboptimal iron. Endurance-trained runners (nine males and 22 females), with serum ferritin (sFer) concentrations mass) was measured pre- and postintervention in a participant subset (n = 10). Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the effectiveness of the two strategies on sFer and Hbmass. There were no sFer treatment (p = .928) or interaction (p = .877) effects; however, sFer did increase (19.7 μg/L; p <.001) over the 8-week intervention in both groups. In addition, sFer was 21.2 μg/L higher (p <.001) in males than females. No Hbmass treatment (p = .146) or interaction (p = .249) effects existed; however, a significant effect for sex indicated that Hbmass was 140.85 g higher (p = .004) inmales compared with females. Training load (p = .001) and dietary iron intake (p = .015) also affected Hbmass. Finally, there were six complaints of severe gastrointestinal side effects in DAY, but only one in ALT. In summary, both supplement strategies increased sFer in athletes with suboptimal iron status; however, the ALT approach was associated with lower incidence of gastrointestinal upset.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)191-196
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
Volume30
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2020

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The effectiveness of daily and alternate day oral iron supplementation in athletes with suboptimal iron status (part 2)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this